


M 



fkm li 








. - • • /^ ''^i. « > 







.'^'^ °^^^* /\ -.W" '^'^'^ '°^' 











''•- •^<?-. ^ .'^te^'. -^^ .^^ /. 




=^•^^9^ 






•3^" 



<.1°^ 



^'- u <^ *- 



o_ * 









'c-K 






o_ *■ 



* V ''. 



"o X./' '*^ 






\.*^^%o^ V^V V*^%°' \'^-'/ 



JOHN CROWNE 

His Life and Dramatic Works 



BY 

ARTHUR FRANKLIN WHITE, Ph. D. 



^ 



Cleveland 

WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY PRESS 

1922 



!b 



^ 






Gift 



CONTENTS 



CHAPTER PAGE 

I. — The Life of John Crowne 7 

The Playwright's Father 7 

Birth, Childhood, and Education 22 

The Beginning Dramatist 1670-77 31 

The Tory Playwright; Efforts to secure an Estate in 

America Zl 

Play writing again for a Livelihood 42 

The Last Years ; Final Efforts to recover his Estate .... 47 

The Religion and Politics of Crowne 52 

The Personality of the Man 59 

II. — Historical Discussion of the Plays dH 

Juliana 64 

Charles the Eighth 68 

Andromache 73 

Calisto 77 

The Countrey Wit 85 

The Destruction of Jerusalem — 

Part one 92 

Part two... 98 

The Ambitious Statesman 103 

The Miseries of Civil-War 107 

Henry the Sixth, the First Part 114 

Thyestes 118 

City PoUtiques 123 

Sir Courtly Nice 137 

Darius 145 

The English Frier 151 

Regulus 158 

The Married Beau 164 

Caligula 171 

Justice Busy 177 

III. — Critical Summary 178 

Tragedies , 178 

Comedies 185 

Crowne as a Poet 195 

Bibliography 197 

Index 209 



PREFACE 

It has been my aim in the following pages to give an account 
of the life and dramatic works of the now little known and less 
studied Restoration playwright, John Crowne. During the first 
half of the eighteenth century his name was kept alive by the 
retention of his best comedy, Sir Courtly Nice, in the repertory 
of the two theatres, but it was not until 1873 that his dramas were 
accessible to the general public in any form other than the original 
quartos and the few reprints of his more successful plays. In 
that year, however, James Maidment and W. H. Logan began 
the publication of his dramas in four volumes for the series known 
as "Dramatists of the Restoration", They prefaced their work 
with a short memoir, and prefixed a brief historical and critical 
account to each play. Their editorial work is of some value, but 
it is made up too frequently of digressions upon the noblemen to 
whom Crowne dedicated his plays. The only considerable scholarly 
investigation hitherto made is Wilhelm Grosse's monograph, John 
Crowne s Komodien und burleske Dichtung, published in 1903. 
Grosse limited himself to the five extant comedies of Crowne and 
his two short burlesque poems, and gave only a sketchy account 
of his life. 

My initial reason for undertaking a study of Crowne was the 
interest which attaches to his three years' residence in America 
and his attendance at Harvard College from 1657 to 1660. I also 
hoped to discover some new facts to add to the meagre record of 
his life, and in this attempt the results have not been entirely barren. 
Furthermore, no detailed study has ever been made of Crowne's 
tragedies, though he is as much a tragic poet as a comic dramatist. 
Accordingly, I have tried to show the relation between these two 
sides of his literary activity, and from the relation thus established 
to determine Crowne's true importance to the students of the drama. 
This lies chiefly, I think, in the fact that his work illustrates all 
the various types of drama in vogue in his time, and that, since he 
wrote primarily for a livelihood, his plays are better evidence of 
contemporary theatrical requirements than the work of men of 
greater genius. Incidentally I have endeavored to show that in 
his comedies Crowne is scarcely more moral than the majority of 



Restoration comic poets, and that therefore Grosse is mistaken in 
assuming that his significance in the history of English drama Hes 
in the fact that he is a forerunner of Blackmore, CoUier, and Steele 
in the struggle for more decency on the stage. 

The present study consists of three parts. In the first I have 
endeavored to trace the life of Crowne more minutely than has 
hitherto been attempted. In the second I have treated of Crowne's 
plays in the order of their writing. Here it has been my purpose 
to discuss in connection with each play the date of production and 
publication, the circumstances connected with the writing, the 
sources, and the manner in which they are used. Finally, in the 
third part I have attempted a critical summary of Crowne's tragedies 
and comedies and an estimate of his importance as a playwright. 

In the course of my investigations and in the preparation of 
this study I have received invaluable assistance for which I wish 
to express my appreciation. To many of my fellow students at 
Harvard from 1915 to 1918 I am indebted for references to out-of- 
the-way material. I owe my thanks also to Mr. William C. Lane, 
librarian of the Harvard University Library, and to his assistants 
for many favors extended to me. Dr. William H. Davis of Wash- 
ington, D. C, and Mr. John H. Edmonds, curator of the Gay Col- 
lection in the Widener Library, have very kindly allowed me the 
use of material in their notebooks concerning the life of William 
Crowne. I am under obligation likewise to Mr. Albert Matthews 
of Boston for numerous suggestions, and to Mr. Julius H. Tuttle, 
acting librarian of the Massachusetts Historical Society for favors 
extended in the use of the Society's books. I wish to record here 
also my appreciation of the interest which Mr. Sidney S. Wilson, 
treasurer of Western Reserve University, has taken in the publi- 
cation of this monograph, and the kindness of Professor W. H. 
Hulme of Western Reserve University in reading the proof and in 
making valuable suggestions. To Dr. William A. Neilson, under 
whom I began this study, my thanks are due for numerous sug- 
gestions in the early phases of my work. Finally, I wish to express 
my deep appreciation to Professor George L. Kittredge for the 
great patience and care with which he has read my manuscript and 
for the helpful and constructive criticism which he has given to me. 

A. F. W. 
Cleveland, May 17, 1922. 



JOHN CROWNE 
HIS LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS 



CHAPTER I. 

The Life of John Crowne. 

The life of John Crowne is very obscure. First hand evidence 
for his boyhood, youth, and young manhood, if not entirely lacking, 
is limited to two or three documents. With regard to his father, 
however, we are more fortunate. Colonel William Crowne was a 
diligent public official during most of the stormy days of the com- 
monwealth; and later, when he took possession of his estate in 
America, he became a person of note in New England. Thus we are 
able to trace his life in some detail for many years. Col. Cfowne's 
career during the time of the Parliamentary government gives us 
a new approach to the early life of his son; with his subsequent 
purchase of a share in the province of Nova Scotia and with his 
emigration to the New World is associated our knowledge of the 
younger Crowne's education; and finally, the loss of that estate 
enables us to understand the son's choice of play-writing as a pro- 
fession, and accounts for the bitterness which marks the closing 
years of his life. I have found it advisable, therefore, to present 
the life of Col. William Crowne at greater length than^ would be 
necessary, were our knowledge of his son accessible through any 
other channel. 

I. THE PLAYWRIGHT'S FATHER. 

Concerning William Crowne the father of John Crowne, the 
dramatist, John Dennis, the critic, made the following statement 
in a letter dated June 23, 1719, and published two years later in 
a collection entitled Original Letters: "Mr. Crown was bred under 
his Father, an Independent Minister in that part of Northern 
America, which is called Nova Scotia."^ This misstatement was 
studiously copied by one biographer after another for one hundred 
and fifty years,^ until A. H. Bullen in 1888, in his article on Crowne 
in the Dictionary of National Biography threw doubt upon it, since 
he found evidence from Colonial papers that William Crowne was 

1 John Dennis, Original Letters, Familiar, Moral and CriHcal, 1, 48. 

2 Theophilus Gibber and others, The Lives of the Poets, III, 104; BiograpMa Dra- 
matica, I, pt. I, 157; Sir Egerton Brydges, Censura Literaria, Second Edition, Vll, 143, 
Maidment and Logan, The Dramatic Works of John Crowne, I, ix-x. 



8 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

a colonel in the English army.^ A year before, Dr. J. S. H. Fogg 
had stated in a paper on John Crowne, "I am sure that his father 
was not a dissenting minister, and equally sure that Maine, and 
not Nova Scotia, was his birth-place."* Although the latter half 
of Dr. Fogg's statement is erroneous, he had documentary evidence 
of the fact that William Crowne was a colonel. Finally in 1891, 
Professor Archibald MacMechan, working apparently without know- 
ledge of Dr. Fogg's published researches, discovered some docu- 
ments in the archives of Nova Scotia which threw new light upon 
the elder Crowne's connection with America, and disproved once 
for all the statement of Dennis that he was an independent minister." 
Thus the matter remained until 1903, when Dr. William H. Davis 
published a short account of Colonel Crowne which added much 
CO the known facts about him.* I have been able to contribute a 
number of items of considerable interest as a result of my own 
researches. 

William Crowne was born in England about 1617J Nothing 
is known of his extraction or of his education, but in 1636, in his 
nineteenth year, he was a member of the suite of Thomas Howard, 
Earl of Arundel, when that nobleman went as Charles I's ambassador 
extraordinary on a mission to the Emperor Ferdinand II. The party 
left England on April 6, 1636, and did not arrive again at London 
until December 27th following. In less than a month after the 
Earl's party had returned, the youthful William Crowne published 
a narrative of the embassage, entitled A true relation of all the 
remarkable places and passages observed in the travels of Thomas, 
Lord Howard, earle of Arundell and Surrey, ambassadour extra- 
ordinary to Ferdinando II, i6^6. This little volume of seventy odd 
pages is for the most part a day-by-day account of the places 
through which the party passed, the dignitaries whom they met, 
and the sights of interest which they saw — all in a dry, journalistic 
vein. Our interest in it, however, is biographical rather than liter- 
ary. It is dedicated "to the true and noble and my honourable 
master, Master Thomas Howard," the grandson of the Earl of 

8 The Dictionary of National Biography, 1888, XIII, 243. 

4 Dr. J. S. H. Fogg, John Crowne — Dramatist and Poet, The Maine Historical and 
Genealogical Recorder, TV, 189. 

B Archibald MacMechan, John Crowne, a Biographical Note. Modern Language 
Notes, VI, col. 277-285. 

6 Wm. H. Davis, Colonel William Crowne and his Family. The New England His- 
torical and Genealogical Register LVII, 406-410. 

7 In a deposition concerning some cattle, made in 1667, Wm. Crowne stated that he 
was about fifty years old. Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County, 
Massachusetts, IV, 2. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 9 

Arundel. Crowne refers to the earl in his dedication as "my dred 
Lord."® In the entry of the work in the register of the Stationers' 
Company it is recorded as "written by William Crowne gent[leman] . 
servant to the said Earle."® From these statements we may infer 
that Crowne was attached to the household of Arundel and perhaps 
served Master Thomas, the grandson, who was ten years his junior,^® 
in some capacity. 

In April, 1638, somewhat more than a year after the embassy, 
Crowne, together with a certain Thomas Addison, was a petitioner 
to the king for a "letters patent for 14 years, for the sole use of 
breeding and feeding wild fowls upon sea-creeks and navigable 
rivers, according to their way and call, with a rent to the king 
of 20 nobles per annum after the first year."^^ The petitioners ex- 
plain that they have found a new method of breeding and feeding 
v/ild fowls, and of snaring them by the sea, "so that the King's 
subjects may be served with a greater store of fowl at more reason- 
able rates than they be now sold at." The attorney-general was 
ordered to draw up a patent, but nothing more is heard of it. 

Whatever Crowne's previous service to the Howards may have 
been, he somehow won the favor of the old Earl, and in the autumn 
of 1638 was created Rouge-Dragon by him. Chancellor, in his 
history of Richmond, quotes an interesting document giving an 
account of the ceremony, but does not mention its source. It runs 
as follows: 

"24th Septemb., 1638, at the Red Lyon Tavern or Inn, was 
created [William] Crowne into the place and office of Rouge 
Dragon Pursuivant of Arms in Ordinary, in manner followinge : 

"The Earle Marshall beeing satt in his Chaire, divers 
Justices of the Peace & Gent : of quality beeinge there present, 
all of them bare — The 3 King's of Arms, viz. : Sr. John Borow, 
Garter, Sr. Wm. Le Neve, Clarenceuse, and Sr. Henry St. 
George, Norroy Kinges of Arms, making their obeisanses 
(beeinge in their Coates of Arms), went and stood by the Earle 
Marshall ; then was brought in Mr. Crowne, Mr. Owen, Yorke, 
bearing the coate of Arms, Mr. Maneringe, Richmond, bearing 
a bowle of Wine, and Mr. Walker, Chester Herald, bearing 
his Lrs. Patent, went before him. After 3 obeisances made then 

8 William Crowne, A True Relation . . . London, 1637. See the dedication, and 
pp. 1 and 70. 

9 Edward Arber, A Transcript of the Registers of the Company of Stationers of London, 
155^-1640, IV, 344. Crowne's narrative was entered on Jan. 21, 1637. 

10 See Dictionary of National Biography tinder Henry Frederick Howard. 

11 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1637-38, p. 363. 



10 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

kneeled Mr. Crowne at the Earle MarshalFs f eete — then kneeled 
Chester deliveringe the Lrs. Patent to my Lord Marshall, who 
gave it to Qiester to reade, and at the word Investimus* the 
Coate of Arms was put on Mr. Crowne, and at the word 
'Creamus' Richmond kneeled, giving to my Lord the bowle 
of Wine, who at the pronouncinge of the said word Creamus 
poured the Wine on his head, giving him the name (Rouge 
Dragon). After the Lrs. Patent reade, then Garter gave him 
his Oath which done, after a brief exortation given by my 
Lord Marshall to Mr. Crowne and delivering him his Letters 
Patent, he ris and stood in his Coate of Arms neere the Kinges 
of Armes who went out of the roome to bring in Mr. Dugdale 

At some time between 1635 and 1640, and most probably after 
his creation as Rouge Dragon in September, 1638, William Crowne 
married Agnes, daughter of Richard Mackworth of Betton Strange, 
County Salop.^* She was the widow of Richard Watts of London, 
the son of Sir John Watts, an alderman and Lord Mayor in 1606 ; 
and her former husband had died on the "Thursday before Whitsun- 
tide," 1635.^* 

Nothing is known of Crowne in the years immediately following 
his marriage, but at the outbreak of the Civil War he allied him- 
self with the parliamentary cause. In 1644 he was serving Basil 
Fielding, Earl of Denbigh, in the capacity of secretary.^^ Denbigh 
was commander-in-chief of the parliamentary forces in the associated 
counties of Warwick, Worcester, Stafford and Salop, where after 
considerable delay he had achieved some victories in the spring 
of 1644.^® In July, 1644, Crowne was in London requesting "more 
strength and money for Lord Denbigh."^^ Incidentally he discovered 
certain intrigues which were in progress in Worcestershire to re- 
move Denbigh from command,^® and suggested that the latter come 
to London himself. At this time Denbigh and his officers were 

12 Edwin B. Chancellor, Historical Richmond, pp. 166-169. Wilhdm Grosse, John 
Crownes Komodien und burleske Dichtung, p. 6, was inclined to doubt the assertion of 
Oldys that Wm. Crowne was Rouge Dragon. The office of Rouge Dragon was created 
by Henry VII upon the vigil of his coronation "in memory of the banner bearing thi» 
device upon it, which he had at Bosworth, painted upon white and green silk." By virtue 
of being created to this office Crowne became a gentleman (if he was not one before) and 
was entitled to armorial bearings. His letters patent are dated Sept. 14, 1638. Cf. Mark 
Noble, A History of the College of Arms, pp. 70, 93-94, 251. 

18 Thos. Blore, History of the Antiquities of the County of Rutland, p. 226. 

14 Robt. Qutterbuck, The History and Antiquities of the County of Hertford, III, 305. 

16 Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, Fourth Report, 1874, p. 267. 
18 See Diet. Nat. Biog. under Basil Fielding. 

17 Royal Commission on Historical MSS., Fourth Report, p. 269. 

18 Henry T. Weyman, The Members of Parliament from Bridgnorth, Transactions of 
the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 4th Series, V, 60. The state- 
ment is derived from J. Willis-Bund, Civil War in Worcestershire, p. 139, which I have 
been unable to see. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE H 

charged with malpractice by the Shropshire committee, and Den- 
bigh threatened to cudgel Humphrey Mackworth, a member of the 
committee, for a remark impugning the courage of his men. In an 
abstract of the charges, brought before the Council of State in 
December, 1649, five years after the events, there is this statement: 
"He [Denbigh] also told Wm. Crowne, his secretary, upon hearing 
that Mackworth had come up, that he hoped he would keep out 
of his sight; and upon Crowne replying he surely would not right 
himself in such a way upon him, he answered he scorned to do it 
himself, but others should . . . ."^® Crowne had reason for 
pouring oil upon the troubled waters, since Denbigh was his em- 
ployer and Humphrey Mackworth his brother-in-law. Denbigh 
cleared himself of the charges, of which the 1649 abstract of 
evidence was only a faint echo. Crowne seems also to have been 
in the employ of a committee of Parliament during part of the 
summer of 1644, since he was intrusted with four letters for the 
west by the body.^° Apparently he continued his services as secre- 
tary until the end of the summer of 1645, for there exists a "copy 
of Lord Denbigh's undertaking to pay Wm. Crowne, his late sec- 
retary, 100 /. Sept. 20, 1645."^^ The relations between Denbigh 
and his late secretary continued cordial, however, as there is a 
record of Crowne's sending from Salop on Oct. 31, 1645 "two 
boxes of Shrewsbury cakes as a token of esteem from his sister, 
Mackworth."^^ In 1646, as Rouge Dragon and a member of the 
College of Arms, he attended the funeral of Robert Devereux, 
Earl of Essex, on Sept. 15th.^^ The next year he was employed in 
some government work in Shropshire, since he is mentioned in a 
letter of Sept. 13, 1647, as desiring his fees.^^ In 1648 he was a 
lieutenant-colonel in the service of Parliament. His particular task 
was to discover delinquents and their estates in counties Stafford 
and Salop. ^* It is likely that he continued at this work for the next 
two years. 

With the beginning of the new decade William Crowne as- 
sumed a position of more prominence in the military and political 

19 State Papers, Domestic, 1649-50, p. 444. Davis, op. cit., p. 406, misinterpreted 
the statement quoted above, and wrote that Crowne was secretary to Humphrey Mackworth. 

20 State Papers, Domestic, 1644, pp. 3S4-35S. 

21 Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, 4th Report, pp. 272-273. 

22 Noble, A History of the College of Arms, p. 255; Davis, op. cit., p. 406, says 
Crowne was one of the seven members of the heraldry college to attend the funeral in 1647, 
but State Papers, Domestic, 1645-47, pp. 468-469, gives the date of the funeral as Sept. 
15, 1646. 

23 State Papers, Domestic, 1625-49, p. 708. 

24 Calendar of the Committee for Advance of Money, 1642-56, Pt. I, pp. 67, 69, 843. 



12 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

affairs of Shropshire. On April 2, 1650, he was made a captain 
of militia for county Salop, and on Aug. 15th, he was chosen one 
of the commissioners of militia for the county. Almost immediately 
upon the heels of this last appointment, he was advanced to be a 
lieutenant-colonel of militia under Col. Humphrey Mackworth.^* 
On March 2, 1650, Col. Mackworth wrote to Col. Godfrey Bosville, 
M. P. : "I beg to request that my brother [Wm.] Crowne may be 
intrusted as one of the commissioners for co. Salop, where he lives."^' 
The appointment followed in June, and Crowne became chairman 
at once. Several months later he was made treasurer of the ac- 
counts of the committee, and in November he was ordered to attend 
a meeting of the Committee for Compounding to hear charges 
against a certain Kendrick. He served as county commissioner 
for Salop for about four years ; in fact, until the office was abolished 
by act of Parliament.^^ When the old committee was eliminated, 
some difficulty arose between the late county commissioners and the 
Committee for Sequestration. On March 14, 1654, this committee 
annulled all county commissions and directed the commissioners 
to deliver up their papers.^^ A fortnight later Col. Crowne wrote 
to the Committee for Sequestration that the accounts were delayed 
because he had to attend on the bench at the assizes. On April 
18, 1654, he addressed one of the committee as follows: "I have 
now come up, being sent from our county to his Highness on a 
business of concern and am daily in attendance, so that for a few 
days I can not attend you."^^ On May 15th Crowne's accounts 
were being delayed further because those of his fellow commis- 
sioner were not complete f^ but at the end of July the Commissioners 
for Sequestration were not satisfied and wrote him thus: "We hear 
that you say all the moneys are paid into the Treasury, but our 
auditor gives a certificate which makes us marvel at your sug- 
gestion therein. We respect you, but .... we plainly tell 
you that we cannot give you any commission till your accounts 
are perfected and moneys paid." Thereupon follows a threat in 
case of failure to comply .^^ Crowne turned in some accounts, but 
they were still unsatisfactory ; and when a certain Mr. Prowd came 

26 State Papers, Domestic, 1650, pp. 288, 505, 509. 

26 Calendar of the Committee for Compounding, 1643-60, Pt. I, p. 180. 

27 For references to his continuous service, see Ibid., 463, 584, 617, 630. 

28 Ibid., 672. 

29 Ibid., 680. 
80 Ibid., 683. 
ti Ibid.. 693. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 13 

for the sequestration books, he refused to give them up. The com- 
missioners then wrote, "Let them be delivered within 14 days, or 
we shall be put to unpleasant means for their recovery/' This 
threat was sufficient, for at the end of another month Prowd re- 
ported the delivery of the books.^^ 

While William Crowne was involved in these unpleasant re- 
lations with the Commissioners for Sequestration, he was returned 
as the sole member of Parliament for Bridgnorth in 1654. When, 
in the following year, there was an attempt by the Royalists to 
surprise Shrewsbury castle, a commission was sent by Lord Pro- 
tector Cromwell to Col. Crowne to raise a regiment of infantry in 
Shropshire in order to protect the town.^^ Cromwell's commission 
reached Crowne on March 7th, and in order to forestall an attack 
on the next day, he hurriedly raised a force of fift>' horse and foot 
among his friends, and kept them at his own expense for ten days 
mntil relief arrived. Several months later he petitioned Cromwell 
for a reimbursement of his expenses : "Having acted for your honour 
and the people's care, and done my best to secure the town and 
country, I beg 37 /., and my own charge and expense I leave to your 
pleasure."^* After Col. Mackworth had certified Crowne's state- 
ment, a warrant was issued for the payment nearly a year later.^** 
In January, 1656, Col. Crowne was still assisting in discovering 
delinquents in Shropshire.^* It is possible that he was then a Com- 
missioner for Sequestration for the county .^^ 

The year 1656 was one of more than usual significance in the 
life of John Crowne's father and in his own, for in that year the 
elder Crowne tied up his fortunes and the wealth which he had 
accumulated as an industrious servant for the commonwealth in 
a venture in the new world. In order to explain the manner in 

62 Ibid., 713, 718, 719. 

88 H. T. Weyman, op. cit., p. 60. Cromwell's commission is as follows: "The Pro- 
tector to Col. Wm. Crowne. It being justly apprehended that the Cavalier party intends 
speedy execution of a very evil design in the parts of Shrewsbury, which they specially 
intend because of the weakness of the garrison, and the multitude of malignants there- 
abouts, I send you down commissions for a regiment, which you are to command for 
protection of the honest party, and securing of Shrewsbury garrison. You are to repair 
thither, and advise with your friends about this and other instructions which I have 
given to the governor there, to whom I have lately sent a troop of horse. 

P. S. — I also send you a commission for a troop. Whitehall, 5 March 1654-55." Cf. 
State Papers, Domestic. 1655, pp. 259-260. 

84 State Papers, Domestic, 1655, p. 259. 

86/btd., 1655-56, pp. 300, 588. 

36 Calendar of the Committee for Compounding, 1643-60, Pt. I, p. 735. 

37 J. E. Auden, Shropshire and the Royalist Conspiracies . . . 1648-1660. Trans- 
actions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 3rd Series, X, 140, 
speaks of Wm. Crowne as a "Commissioner of Sequestration for Shropshire at the time 
of the threatened Royalist uprising in 1655." 



14 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

which William Crowne came to be a joint proprietor in the province 
of Nova Scotia, it will be necessary for us to retrace our steps 
for a fev/ years. In 1654 Major Robert Sedgewick, under orders 
from Cromwell, sailed to Nova Scotia and took possession of it as 
an ancient part of the English dominion. It was then in the hands 
of Sir Charles de la Tour, who had inherited the estate from his 
father, Sir Claud de St. Etienne. The province had originally been 
granted in 1621 by James I to Sir William Alexander, Lord of 
Menstrue, but the latter had made it over under date of April 30, 
1630, to Sir Claud de St. Etienne. The dispossessed Charles de la 
Tour went to London and petitioned Cromwell for the return of 
his estate.^^ According to MacMechan's investigations, CromwelFs 
council was not prepared to favor de la Tour's petition, because he 
was a Frenchman, until he interested Col. Thomas Temple in a 
partnership. Temple was a nephew of Lord Fiennes, a member 
of the council, and since he was suspected of Royalist leanings, 
his uncle advised him to leave the country and seek to mend his 
fortunes in America.^^ Before the patent could be procured, how- 
ever, a debt of De la Tour's had to be paid — a sum of 3379 /., which 
he owed to the widow Margaret Gibbons.*^ As neither Temple nor 
De la Tour had the necessary funds, they interested William Crowne 
in the matter, and by advancing the amount he became their joint 
partner.*^ On May 29, 1656, the Council of State approved of the 
joint petition of De la Tour, Temple, and Crowne, and ordered 
a patent to be granted after the performance of the conditions of 
the debt. On July 14th articles of agreement were drawn up, and 
about a month later, on August 9th, the patent was granted.*^ For 
a financial consideration De la Tour gave up his title to iemple 
and Crowne on September 20, 1656.^^ 

The new proprietors of Nova Scotia came to America in the 
summer of 1657. Crowne was still in England on April 28th, 
but on September 12th an agreement was made between Temple 
and Crowne in Boston, New England. Crowne is described in 
the articles as "late of the Parish of Martins in the field in the 
Countie of Middlesexe."** On this occasion the two proprietors 

38 James P. Baxter, Documentary History of the State of Maine, X, 25-27. 
S9 MacMechan, op. cit., col. 279. 

40 State Papers, Colonial, 1574-1660, p. 441. 

41 Ibid., 1661-68, p. 597. 

42 Ibid., 1574-1660, pp. 441, 444, 447. 
4Zlbid., p. 453. 

*4 Suffolk County (Massachusetts) Registry of Deeds. Ill, 108. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 15 

divided their property, Col. Crowne getting "that Tract of Land 
within the Territories of Accadie or Nova Scotia which lyeth west- 
ward from the mouth of the River Damache alias Machias . . . 
and so all along the westward bancke of the said River . . . 
as the said River Runneth into the Countrey one hundred Leagues, 
and extendeth Westward all along Muscontus Scittuate on the con- 
fines of New England .... with all the Islands Rivers 
Riveletts Lakes Piscaries houses fforts and in particular the fort 
at Pentagonet or Ponobscot . . . ."*^ Each party to the agree- 
ment gave a bond of twenty thousand pounds, which was recorded 
in Boston on February 18, 1658. 

Crowne went at once to his new possession and built a trading 
house "far up ye river of Penobscot, at a place called Negue; to 
which he gave his owne name, and called it Crownes point." But 
when later Temple learned of his thriving beaver trade, he pretended 
that Crowne had broken some article of their agreement and seized 
the fort at Penobscot, the trading house at Negue, and all of his 
lands. Col. Crowne attempted to get justice in the courts of New 
England without avail. Such is the account which John Crowne 
gave of his father's difficulties with Temple in a memorial pre- 
pared in 1698.^^ In a petition dated 1666, however. Col. Crowne 
himself had given a somewhat different version of his troubles. 
"About six years since," i. e., in 1660, he offered to lease his property 
to Temple, but the latter refused it, and he leased it for several 
years to Capt. Corwin and Ensign Scottoe at 110 /. per annum. 
The lessees and Temple fell out, as Crowne believed, because the 
former had cleared a handsome profit of 300 /. in one year; there- 
upon Temple forced Crowne to lease the land to him for four 
years at the same rental. The rent was secured by the bonds of 
Breed and Usher, Boston merchants, and they paid the first year; 
but after that Col. Crowne could get no satisfaction, even in the 
courts.*'^ He was in Boston in the winter of 1658 and during most 
of 1659, and on May 30, 1660, he was made a freeman of the 
town.*^ 

45 Suffolk County (Massachusetts) Registry of Deeds, III, 108. 

46 John Crowne's memorial concerning Penobscot in 1698. Reprinted by J. P. Baxter, 
op. cit., X, 27-28. 

47 J, H. Metcalf , Annals of the Town of Mendon, pp. 27-28. Dr. Davis, p. 407, 
states that Crowne leased this land to Corwin and Scottoe on Nov. 1, 1658. 

48 In a petition dated July 10, 1682 Crowne stated that he had wintered in Boston 
for two years previous to his journey to England early in 1661. Cf. Metcalf, p. 31. He 
witnessed deeds in Boston on April 9, and July 26, 1659. Cf. Suffolk Deeds, III, 222, 
261. For his election as freeman of Boston see The Records of the Colony of Massachu- 
setts Bay in New England, edited by Natl. B. Shurtleil, IV, Pt. I, 461. 



16 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

With the restoration of Charles II in 1660, the claim of Crowne 
and Temple to their grant of Nova Scotia by "the usurper" Crom- 
well was jeopardized. Thomas Elliott, one of the grooms of the 
bedchamber to Charles II, petitioned his master for a grant of the 
province.*^ Sir Lewis Kirke and the widow of Sir William Alex- 
ander also petitioned for it, and in 1661 the French ambassador 
claimed it for France. ^^ Knowledge of these developments came 
to Crowne and Temple, and on December 24, 1660, the latter wrote 
to England stating that he was sending a petition by Colonel Crowne 
to the king in the name of the three original grantees, De la Tour, 
Temple, and Crowne. Colonel Crowne had arrived in England and 
presented the petition by March Ist.''^ On June 22, 1661, he sub- 
mitted a statement of the manner in which he and Temple became 
proprietors.^^ Temple himself arrived in England shortly before 
the end of February, 1662, and at once prepared an answer to the 
claim of the French ambassador.*^^ He also secured the suspension 
of Thomas Breedon as governor of Nova Scotia. Later, however, 
he was forced to pay Breedon 500 /. per annum in order to retain 
control of the province.^* 

Colonel Crowne's departure for England at the beginning of 
1661 was occasioned, no doubt, by the complications arising out 
of the various claims then being made to the province of which 
he was in part proprietor ; but the journey was made necessary 
also by the duty imposed upon him as Rouge Dragon to be present 
at the coronation. In the previous year he had been one of the 
citizens of Boston to welcome the regicides, Whaley and Goffe; 
but as Dr. Davis has pointed out, Hutchinson was mistaken in calling 
him a "noted Royalist."^^ Noble remarks that among the legitimate 
members of the College of Arms "who had started aside from their 
duty," Crowne "was permitted to retain his office."^® He took part 
in the coronation ceremonies as Rouge Dragon on April 23, 1661 : 
but he soon resigned the office, and on May 25th it was granted to 

49 State Papers, Colonial, 1574-1660, p. 484. 

60 Ibid., 1574-1660, pp. 484, 493, 497; Ibid., 1661-68, p. 66. Cf. MacMechan, op cit., 
col. 280. 

61 State Papers, Colonial, 1574-1660, pp. 496-497. 

62 Ibid., 1661-68, p. 39. 

63 Ibid., pp. 77-78. 
5^ Ibid., p. 102. 

55 [Thomas] Hutchinson, The History of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay from 
1628-1691. 2nd edition, p. 208; Davis, op. cit., p. 407. Saml. Jennison, William and John 
Crowne, New England Historical and Genealogical Register, VI, 47, repeats Hutchinson's 
error; and Grosse, referring to his article, says, p. 7, "Crownes Vater war ein treuer 
Anhanger der Konigspartei." 

66 Noble, op. cit., p. 268. 



LIFE AXD DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHX CROWXE 17 

Francis Sandford.^'' About this time Colonel Crowne was busily- 
engaged in an endeavor to make the new royal government more 
kindly disposed towards the Massachusetts Bay Colony, which had 
been frowned upon because of its cruelty to Quakers. The success 
of his efforts is seen in a letter of July 1661 from Lord Say and 
Seale to the governor of the colony. "Mr. Crowne .... 
hath appeared," he wrote, "both here in the council and to the Lord 
Chamberlain and others as really and cordially for you as any one 
could do, and had allaied the ill opinion of your cruelty against 
the quakers, willingly neglected his passage to stay here to serve 
you .... wherefore I must request you will really own and 
accordingly requite Mr. Crowne his love, care and pains for you, 
of which I have been an eye witness."^^ The Colonel was still in 
London in December, 1661, in the interests of the colony, ^^ and must 
have remained there for some months longer, as Governor Endicott 
addressed a letter to him on February 7, 1661-62, desiring his 
"farther favor" on behalf of the colony. He explained that Mr. 
Norton and ]\Ir. Bradstreet had been appointed by the General 
Court to appear before the king, but because of Norton's illness, 
they "are necessitated to send without them."^° 

As a reward for his services, the General Court passed a 
resolution on October 8, 1662, as follows : 

"This Court as an acknowledgment of the great paines of 

Coll VCm Croune in behalfe of his country when he was in 

England, judge meete to graunt him fiue hundred acres of 

land in any place not legally disposed of."^^ 
The land was laid out in 1663 "at a place neere the cold spring, 
neere vnto the roade wch leadeth from Sudbury vnto Conecticot."^- 

Meanwhile the difficulties between Temple and Crowne con- 
tinued. According to the 1698 memorial of John Crowne, which 
we must accept with reservations as a one-sided account, his father 
threatened to complain to the king and Privy Council, but Temple 
quieted him by promising restitution of his lands and reparation 

57 State Papers, Domestic, 1660-61. p. 595. MacMechan, col. 2S1, implies that 
Crowne was made Rouge Dragon ixnder Charles II, after Temple had been granted a patent 
for Nova Scotia in his own name, but as we have seen, Crowne held the office from 1638. 

58 Hutchinson, op. cit., p. 220; Metcalf, op. cit., p. 26. 

59 Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, 5th Series, I, 394. 

60 Letter of Gov. Endicott to Col. Crowne dated Feb. 7, 1661, quoted by Metcalf, p. 
25, from Massachusetts Archives, Political, CVI. p. 50. Metcalf assumes that the date 
is 1661, but Palfrey, History of New England, II, 521, note 2, is right in dating it 
1661-62. 

61 The Records of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay in New England, IV, Pt. 2, pp. 
60-61. 

Q2 Ibid., pp. 150-151. 



18 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

for his wrongs. When, therefore, Crowne returned to New England, 
Temple gave him letters to his agents in America bidding them 
restore the fort at Penobscot and his lands; but when Crowne 
arrived he found that Temple's agents had been advised by other 
letters to keep him out. Upon the return of Temple to Nova 
Scotia, after he had secured the grant in his own name, his former 
partner complained of this shameful treatment. Yet he finally- 
leased Penobscot for a short period to Temple, and several New 
England merchants were bound for the payment of the rent; but 
no rent was ever paid and the colonial courts refused to interfere, 
alleging that the case was outside their jurisdiction. Thus matters 
continued until 1667, when by the treaty of Breda Charles II 
returned Nova Scotia to the French and Temple was ordered to 
surrender it.®^ 

It has been stated repeatedly that William Crowne died in the 
same year in which his property in Penobscot was ceded to the 
French by royal decree, and only recently has investigation estab- 
Hshed the error of the statement. J. G. Palfrey seems to be re- 
sponsible for the mistake. In his History of New England he 
wrote: "We have the record of his death in Massachusetts *in 
1667, aged 50',"^* basing his information upon an entry in a com- 
pilation of statistics concerning "Early Settlers of Essex and Old 
Norfolk": "Croun (Crown) Col. William, ae. 50 in 1667."«^ This 
brief record in turn owes its origin to a deposition, already referred 
to, in which Col. Crowne, testifying concerning some cattle, states 
his age as "about fifty years. "^^ MacMechan and Grosse both 
accepted Palfrey's statement as correct;^'' but as we shall see, the 
elder Crowne did not die until fifteen years later. 

In the years immediately following Crowne's return to New 
England, he was probably a resident either of Boston or Roxbury,®® 
but in 1667 he joined with a group of townsfolk in settling Mendon. 
On April 2, 1667, he was nominated "to enter the Public Acts 
respecting Mendon from the beginning of the Plantation to this 

68 The 1698 memorial of John Crowne, J. P. Baxter, op. cit., X, 28-29. See also 
State Papers, Colonial, 1661-68, p. 520. Temple did not surrender the province until 
1670, and John Crowne later claims that he gave up Penobscot contrary to his instructions. 

64 J. G. Palfrey, op. cit., II, 287, note 4. 

05 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, VI, 249. 

C6 Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County (Mass.) IV, 2. 

67 MacMechan, col. 281; Grosse, p. 8. 

68 On Oct. 29, 1665 he was chosen as Job Tyler's man in a suit. See Essex Records, 
op. cit.. Ill, 442. Tyler was then a resident of Roxbury. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWXE 19 

tyme," and on June 7th he was elected first town register.^^ Two 
years later, on May 27, 1669, the General Court granted the petition 
of Mendon that Col. Crowne be empowered to give the constable 
his oath and to solemnize marriage/^ Here he continued to reside 
for several years, and was chosen annually as a selectman in the 
years between 1667 and 1673."^ His name is not among the list 
of selectmen chosen at the beginning of 1673, and there is reason 
to believe that he ceased to be a constant resident about this time; 
for on May 7th the General Court, finding that there was no magis- 
trate near I\Iendon, appointed another man to the office. '^^ In the 
following year difficulties of some sort arose between Col. Crowne 
and the townspeople of ]\Iendon, and on April 28, 1674, the General 
Court issued the following order : 

"This Court taking into consideration that Collonell Wil- 
liam Crowne hath lived here a considerable time from his wife 
judge meete to Order that the said Colonell do take passage 
for England & return thither to his wife by the next oppor- 
tunit}^ of Shipping after these ships that are now ready to sail 
under penalty of twenty pounds accordmg to law."'^ 
He did not return to England, however, but fled to Rhode Island: 
and on September 4th following, the townsfolk of ^lendon record 
"a Loving agrement between the Colonell and ourselves."^* During 
this period Crowne continued to hold his property in the town and 
he gave it as his residence as late as November 25, 1674-J^ 

With the outbreak of King Philip's Wslv in 1675, the Colonel 
removed to Prudence Island near Newport, where he resided until 
hostilities were over. Shortly after, he went to visit his son, Henr\', 
who Vv'as living in Nevr Castle, New Hampshire.'^ By the middle 

69 Metcalf, op. cit., pp. 12, 16. 

70 Records of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay in New England, IV, Pt. 2, 434. 
See Metcalf, p. 41, for the fidl answer to the petition. 

Tl Metcalf , pp. 16, 31, 37, 47, 54. 

72 Metcalf, pp. 56-57. 

73 A MS. record of the Suffolk County Court in the Boston Athenaeum. I am 
indebted to Mr. John H. Edmonds, curator of the Gay Collection in Harvard College 
Library, for this reference and for other valuable information about William CrowTie. 

74 Metcalf, p. 60. 

75 Davis, op. cit., p. 408; Suffolk Deeds, IX, 207-208. 

76 Petition of June 10, 1682. Metcalf, p. 30. Henry Crowne, the younger brother 
of the playwright, was bom in England about 1648. He was a witness in a divorce case 
in Boston on Jan. 16, 1668 (Suffolk County Court Files, 913), and according to the 
investigations of Dr. Davis, he was living at Portsmouth, Xew Hampshire in 1672. In 
1676 he married Alice Rogers by whom he had five children. His occupation was that 
of an inn-keeper in 1682 when he was allowed "to keep a house of public entertainment." 
(Collections cf the New Hampshire Historical Society, VIII, 77.) The pre^-ious September 
(1681) he had been "fined 20s. for allowing unlawfiil games such as billiards, and tables 
in his house." (State Papers, Colonial, 1681-85, p. 120). He was an attorney and notary 
public, and there are records of his serving frequently on juries. He died between May 
and September, 1696. Dr. Davis, p. 408, says the elder Crowne visited his son in the 

winter of 1678-79. 



20 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

of August, 1679, he had again become a resident of Boston, and there 
presumably he lived during the few remaining years of his Hfe/' 
Once more, however, before he had ended his days, the elder Crowne 
made an effort to secure compensation from the government in 
England for the loss of his estate along the Penobscot as a result 
of the treaty of Breda and the malice of Temple. In 1679 he 
directed his son John in London to petition for Mounthope near 
the Plymouth settlements, and later for Boston Neck m tne JNlar- 
ragansett country, by way of reparation for his losses; but those 
petitions and the subsequent efforts of his heir to secure a just 
settlement are rather a part of the life of the playwright and will 
be treated later. After he took up his residence in Boston in 1679, 
Col. Crowne began to dispose of his land in ]\Iendon, apparently 
as a means of subsistence.'^^ ''An for yt 500 acres of Land yt ye 
General Court granted me," he wrote in his petition of June 10, 
1682, "considering ye charges in looking it out and laying it out and 
ye Indians demanding pay for it of me, all things considered, it 
will be little worth to me." In the same petition he dwells upon 
his physical condition: "And God having laid his hand heavy on 
me these 7 or 8 months hath brought me so low yt I am scarce 
able to stir out of my bed." On July 13th following the General 
Court voted him five pounds,"^^ and on October 11th "the Court 
having pervsed Colonel Wm. Crowne his peticon in all respects, and 
considering in the season mentioned his service to & for the country 
together wth his condition, judge meet to order the Treasurer of 
the country to pay him, as a recompence for the same, fiueteene 
pounds money, defaulking the fiue pounds the council lent him, to 
be returned. "®° A generous court, indeed ! 

The aged Colonel was steadily growing feebler, and on De- 
cember 24, 1682, he made his will, which is as follows : 

"William Crowne, Esqr. being very weake in body but 
of sound minde and memory and lookeing for my change every 
day to bee received to glory wch God hath given me some 
good comfort of. Thinking fitting to Set down how I would 
have my Estate disposed of v/hen I am dead : As concerning 
wt his Majtie hath pleased to promise to give me concerning 
the delivering of my right up to the French in Nova Scotia, 

71 Suffolk Deeds, XI, 208-209; XII, 49, 75-76. 

78 Idem. 

79 Metcalf , p. 30. 

80 The Records of the Colony of Mass. Bay m New Eng., V, 378. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 21 

my son John being- prosecuting of it of the King, whatsoever 
his Majtie doth bestow on me, I give him the one half; as 
also the bond of Four hundred and Forty pounds the halfe 
of that. And for my Son Henry I leave to him the money 
that is oweing me from William Allen of Prudence Island 
by order of the Town Councell of Portsmouth; and also the 
moiety of wt the Towne of Mendham owes me wch is neer forty 
pounds, and also the Moity of wt five hundred Acres of Land 
shalbee Sould for lying neer Sudbury. And for the ten pounds 
wch the General Court hath ordered me shalbee to defray the 
charges of my buriall if I dye suddenly: and as for my Bedding 
with appurt thereunto I give to Sarah Covell if Shee continue 
with me till I dye, and for her babe Dorothy I give her ten 
Shillings in money as also her daughter Sara the like, all my 
wearing apparell I give to my son Henry. And the Remainder 
of my Estate the whole being by my Son John and Henry I 
give to my children my daughter Agnes haveing a double part. 
And this I do declare to be my last will and Testimony revok- 
ing all former. As for the debt I owe wch is seven pounds 
to that worthy man Mr. Hull I desire he may be paid out of 
wt I have oweing, the profits of my above mencon'd Lands and 
debts. I do appoint my Son Hary to bee my Executor. Unto 
wch I have put my hand this twenty fourth day of December 
in the years 1682. Willi : Crowne."^' 

Col. Crowne was dead by February 26, 1683, for on that date 
the will was probated and Sarah Covell acknowledged the receipt 
from Henry Crowne of her share in the benefaction. As we glance 
over the facts of his life which have come down to us, we find that 
he was an energetic. God-fearing man who won the respect ot his 
fellows under the commonwealth in England, and of the hardy 
Puritans of New England. He could not match the knavery of 
Thomas Temple with like shrewdness, and sought in vain to get 
justice for his claims. If he appears to have been frequently in 
the courts of law, we must remember that the records from which 
we have reconstructed his life are mainly legal and official in nature. 

It has been necessary to dwell thus minutely upon the life of 
Colonel William Crowne in order that, with it as a background, 
we may fathom the more obscure recesses of the life of his eldest 
son John, the Restoration playwright. It is only through the activi- 
ties of his father that we shall be able to make clear in any measure 
the early life and education of John Crowne, and the attempts which 
absorbed the later years of his life to recover his disputed patrimony. 

81 Suffolk County (Mass.) Probate, VI, 401. 



22 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

11. BIRTH, CHILDHOOD, AND EDUCATION 

John Crowne was the eldest of the three children of WilHam 
Crowne and Agnes Mackworth Crowne. His parents were married, 
as we have seen, probably at a date subsequent to the creation of 
his father as Rouge Dragon in the autumn of 1638. His mother, 
Agnes, was the daughter of Richard Mackworth of Betton Strange, 
County Salop, who had married Dorothy, the daughter of Lawrence 
Cranage of County Stafford on October 29, 1600. Agnes was the 
third child of this union and was probably born about 1617, since 
her elder sister Margaret was baptized on July 1, 1615, and her 
father died in 1617.^^ She had one brother, Humphrey, who, as 
we have had occasion to note, was prominent in the political affairs 
of Shropshire during the early years of the Civil War. He was a 
colonel in the services of Parliament and was appointed governor 
of Shrewsbury in 1646. He was later one of the Lord Protector's 
council, and when he died in 1654, he was buried in Westminster 
Abbey. After the Restoration, however, his remains were dug up 
and desecrated.^^ Concerning John Crowne's mother we have no 
other information except the fact that she was first married to 
Richard Watts of Hertfordshire, who died in 1635. Besides her 
eldest son John, she had two other children, — Henry, who was 
born about 1648, and a daughter Agnes. The only evidence con- 
cerning Agnes Crowne which I have been able to find is contained 
in her father's will, where she is given a double share in a part of 
the estate. Col. Crowne's wife did not accompany him to America : 
she was alive presumably in 1674 when the Colonel was ordered to 
"return to his wife" in England,®* but how long she lived we are 
unable to say. 

The place of John Crowne's birth has been a matter of dis- 
pute. As we have seen, Dennis wrote that he ''was bred under 
his Father .... in that part of Northern America, which 
is called Nova Scotia."®^ The editor of the New- England Historical 
and Genealogical Register in 1851 recalled the letter of Dennis some- 
what vaguely, but he drew the natural conclusion when he wrote, 
"It is somewhere asserted that Mr. Crowne was born in Nova 

82 Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, 2nd 
Series, I, 392. 

83 Thomas Blore, History of Rutland, p. 129. Cf. also Anthony Wood, Athenae 
Oxonienses, II, 371. 

84 See above, p. 19. 
86 Dennis, I, 48. 



LIFE AXD DIL\MATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWXE 23 

Scotia/'®^ In 1888 Dr. J, S. H. Fogg stated correctly enough that 
\Mlliam Crowne was not a dissenting minister, but he added 
concerning John that he was "equally sure that Maine and not 
Nova Scotia was his birthplace. "^^ Three years later Professor 
MacMechan concluded from evidence which we shall give presently 
that the younger Crowne "certainly could not have been born in 
America. "^^ Yet in reviewing this article Grosse remarks : "Die 
starre Behauptung ^lacMechans, dass Crowne sicher nicht in 
Amerika geboren sei, entbehrt eines liberzeugenden Beweises."^® 
The convincing proof which has apparently been wanting hitherto, 
I can now supph'. It will be recalled that William Crowne was 
married to Agnes ^lacworth at some time between 1635 and 1640,*^ 
and most likely after September 1638. From that time until 1657 
his life in England can be traced with some approach at detail. The 
life of the elder Crowne contains no e\'idence that he considered 
America as a place of residence until 1656, when by one of the turns 
of fortune he became interested in the province of Nova Scotia. 
We can state, therefore, with considerable degree of finality that 
John Crowne was not born in America, and that he zi'as bom in 
England, — in what county we do not know, but probably Shropshire, 
where the family estate of his mother was located, and where his 
father was serving as secretary to Lord Denbigh in 1644. If this 
supposition be correct. County Salop may claim two of the Restora- 
tion dramatists, since it has long been known that William Wycher- 
ley was born in Shropshire. Unfortunately such of the parish 
registers of Shropshire as have been published fail to confirm our 
inference, but many of them are incomplete for this period and many 
doubtless have been destroyed. 

The date of Crowne's birth has likewise been a matter of 
uncertainty. Gosse placed it at about 1640,^^ and ^lacMechan, 
on the basis of Crowne's attendance at Har\^ard College bet^veen 
1657 and 1660, accepted the same date.^- Grosse comes to a different 
conclusion. In the dedication to his first literary effort, a prose 
romance, entitled Pandion and Amphigeneia and published in Jan- 
uary 1665, Crowne wrote: "I ^vas scarcely 20 years of age when 

86 The New Eng. Hist, and Geneal. Register, V, 308. 
8TJ. S. H. Fogg, op. cit., rV, 189. 
8S MacMechan, col. 282. 

89 Grosse, p. 7. 

90 Davis, op. cit., p. 406. 

91 Edmund Gosse, A History of Eighteenth Century Literature, p. 58. 

92 MacMechan, col. 282. 



24 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

I fancyed it." On the basis of this statement Grosse concludes, 
"Somit ist das Jahr 1645 mit Bestimmtheit als das seiner Geburt 
anzusetzen."^^ Without further evidence one might be incHned to 
doubt this conclusion in view of Crowne's own statement. He may 
well have "fancyed" his romance when he was little more than 
twenty, but that is not to say that the result of his fancies impressed 
the printers of London immediately and that they were straightway 
spread upon the uncompromising printed page. On the other hand, 
it is much more likely that a youth newly returned from the Puri- 
tan settlements of New England, and left behind by his father with- 
out influential friends in London, would find considerable difficulty 
and expend much time in persuading a printer to publish his ro- 
mantic fancies and youthful dreams. It is not necessary, however, 
to rely upon such reasoning to prove Grosse's conclusion erroneous. 
In a deposition made in 1660 John Crowne himself testifies to 
his age. I shall quote the entire document. 

"John Croune aged about twenty yeares testifieth & saith. 
That he was sent by his fifather Colin: WilHam Croune to 
receive sattisfaction for a bill of seventeen pounds and twelve 
shillings, which my ffather gaue me, charged by mr. Roger 
Spencer as he told me vpon mr. Robert Jordan bearing date 
the 17th of July 1658, vnto which Joshua Scottow his name was 
subscribed as a witness, and this deponent did then shew mr. 
Robert Jordan the bill as abouesaid at which time he the said 
mr. Jordan did acknowledge that he had promised to pay sayd 
seventeen pounds and twelve shillings vnto ithis deponents 
father but wt hall sayd that my fifather did not send for it 
and also that mr. Spencer had given him a Counter Order, 
so that he would not pay the debt vnlesse the lawe Compelled 
him: and I doe further Testify that this was the principall 
ground of my Journey: in which I spent almost three weekes 
time and further saith not, taken vpon oath after the Inter- 
lyining the word Robert & Robert in the Margin this 14th 
September 1660 before me 

Edward Rawson "Commissioner"^* 

As Crowne was, by his own statement, "aged about twenty years" 
on September 14, 1660, we may now reaffirm with confidence the 
estimates of Gfosse and MacMechan, and say that our author was 
born about 1640. 

93 Grosse, p. 10. Crowne's romance has been inaccessible to me. 

94 This deposition is reprinted by J. S. H, Fogg, John Crowne — Poet and Dramatist. 
The Maine Historical and Genealogical Recorder, IV, 189-190. The original document was 
probably in Dr. Fogg's own collection, which has been dispersed since his death. Inquiries 
have failed to reveal its present habitat. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHX CROWXE 25 

Concerning the education of the youthful Crowne while he 
was in England, we may only infer. His father seems to have had 
more than ordinary opportunities for learning while he was con- 
nected with the household of the Earl of Arundel, if we may judge 
from his little journalistic volume concerning the expedition to 
Vienna. Moreover, he married into a well-to-do Shropshire family, 
and by his own energies seems to have placed himself in comfort- 
able circumstances by means of the political offices which he held 
under the Parliamentary and Cromwellian governments.^^ We may 
presume, therefore, that his young son would receive what educa- 
tional advantages he could procure for him. It is possible, indeed, 
that he may have attended Shrewsbury School, where his uncle 
Humphrey Mackworth received his early education. Certain it is 
that John Crowne must have had considerable training in con- 
struing the classics in order to enter Harvard College, as he did, in 
the autumn of 1657, since one of the rules for entrance to that 
institution then was ability "to understand Tully, or such like 
Classical Latine author ex tempore, and to make and speake true 
Latine in verse and prose .... and to decline perfectly the 
paradigms of nounes and verbes in the Greek tongue."^^ 

When Col. William Crowne came to America in the summer 
of 1657 as joint proprietor of Nova Scotia with Thomas Temple, 
he brought his eldest son with him; but even in the unsettled con- 
dition of the new world he was thoughtful of the youth's education. 
As evidence of this there is an entry in an early Steward's Book 
of Harvard College, still extant, which runs as follows : 
"Crowne is creditor 
"2—7—57 payd to Thomas chesholme 002—02—00"" 
Thus on September 2, 1657, Col. Crowne paid 2 I. 2 s. for his son's 
tuition and the youth began his studies in the new world. Unfor- 
tunately the page opposite the above entry in the Steward's Book 
has been cut out, but in the Steward's account with the college 
Sibky found payments made by "Collonell Crowne", in the quarters 
ending 5 — 10 — 57 and 5 — A — 59, that is December 5, 1657 and 
June 5, 1659.^^ In addition to these financial records of young 

95 Evidence of his prosperity is found in his ability to buy an interest in Nova Scotia 
by paying 3379 /. owing to the widow of Major Gibbons. See State Papers, Colonial, 
1661-68. p. 597. 

96 New England's First Fruits, in respect to the progress of Learning in the Colledge 
at Cambridge in Massachusetts-hay . . . London, 1643, p. 13. 

97 The Steward's Book of Thomas Chesholme, p. 323. This manuscript is in the 
archives of the Harvard College Library. 

98 J. L. Sibley, Biographical Sketches of Graduates of Harvard University, I, 577. 



26 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Crowne's attendance at Harvard there is preserved a curious state- 
ment to that effect by our author himself in an undated deposition : 

"John Crown, gentleman, maketh oath, that while he was 
at Boston, in New-England, soon after his Majesty's happy 
Restoration, Goffe and Whaley, two of the execrable murderers 
of his Majesty's royal father, of blessed memory, landed there; 
. . . . That after the said Goffe and Whaley resided some 
time at Boston, visiting and being visited by the principal per- 
sons of the town, and that among others they visited Mr. John 
Norton, the teacher of the principal independent church of the 
said town, . . . That the deponent then boarded in the 
house of Mr. Norton, and was present when they visited him, 
and that he received them v/ith great demonstrations of ten- 
derness; that after this the said Goffe and Whaley went and 
resided in Cambridge (the university of New-England, of 
which the deponent was a member,) and that, having acquaint- 
ance with many of that university, he inquired of them how 
the said Goffe and Whaley were received . . . ."®® 

In view of Crowne's own testimony and that of the college records, 
it is probable that he was in continuous attendance at Harvard 
College from 1657 until the end of 1660. His three weeks' trip 
to Penobscot, of which he bears witness in the deposition of 1660, 
was made in the summer of 1658, when presumably the college 
was not in session. 

When the future playwright was a student at Harvard, "the 
College was," in the words of Josiah Quincy, "conducted as a 
theological institution, in strict coincidence with the nature of the 
political constitution of the colony; having religion for its basis 
and chief object."^°° The curriculum was made up of such studies 
as physics (i. e. natural philosophy), arithmetic, geometry, and 
astronomy among the sciences; ethics, politics, and logic among 
the philosophical studies ; and among the languages Greek, Hebrew, 
Chaldee, and Syriac. In addition a part of each week was given 
up to rhetoric, prosody, declamations, commonplaces, and disputa- 

89 George Chalmers, Political Annals of the Present United Colonies, Bk. I, pp. 
263-264. 

100 New England's First Fruits, pp. 14-16. Adrien Jacquinot, L'Universite Harvard, 
Revue Internationale de I'Enseignement, I (1881), 54, gives a table summarizing the 
curriculum of the period from 1636-1692, and showing, in hours a week, the distribution 
of work among the difiEerent subjects of instruction during the three years. 

Greek 6 hours Rhetoric 3 hours 

Hebrew 1 Declarmations 3 

Chaldee 1 Commonplaces 3 

Syriac 1 Bible 1 

History or Botany 1 Books of Ezra and Daniel 1 

Arithmetic or Geometry 2 New Testament 1 

Logic and Physcis 2 Theological Catechism 1 

Ethics 2 Disputations 7 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 27 

tions. The study of the Bible and the catechism was a natural part 
of the work, while history was assigned to the winter months, and 
the study of plants to the summer. The rules of conduct were very 
rigid, and each student had to report to his tutor at the seventh hour 
in the morning for prayers, and at the fifth hour at night to account 
for his private reading during the day.^°^ In view of such a system 
of education one does not wonder at the remark of Dennis con- 
cerning Crowne: "The Vivacity of his Genius made him soon 
grow impatient of that sullen and gloomy education, and soon oblig'd 
him to get loose from it and seek his Fortune in England." What- 
ever may be said of the puritanical instruction of America's first 
college as a training for the future playwright, it is likely that there 
he first became acquainted with the works of the Greek and Latin 
historians such as Suetonius, Curtius, Dio Cassius, and others, who 
furnished him later with much material for his tragedies. In this 
respect, at least, the thorough training which he received in the 
classical languages stood him in good stead.^°^ Of his life during 
these three years we know nothing other than what is contained in 
his deposition concerning the reception to Goffe and Whaley. In 
1660 he was boarding at the home of Rev. John Norton, the min- 
ister of the principal church in Boston. ^^^ The summer vacations he 
doubtless spent in part in journeys to his father's estate along the 
Penobscot. We know of at least one such adventure in the sum- 
mer of 1658, which Crowne himself records. ^°^ 

There is no sure evidence as to the date of the youthful Crowne's 
return to England, but it is highly probable that he accompanied 
his father when the latter sailed for London at the close of December, 
1660. Probably, as Dennis suggests, he was eager to get away 
from the restricting influences of puritanical New England to the 
freer life of his native country, and it is scarcely likely that Col. 
Crov/ne would leave his son behind in the new world in view of 
the uncertainty which he must have felt about his estate. The 
further fact that John Crowne did not take a degree at Harvard 
College leads to the same inference. Had he remained in New 

101 See above, p. 26, n. 100. 

102 Grosse, pp. 11-12, remarks concerning Harvard College in 1657-60 and Crowne's 
education there: "Der Ruf, den diese Universitat zu jener Zeit genoss, berichtigt uns zu 
dem Schlusse, dass Crowne dort eine grundliche Bildung genossen hat. Gar oft giebt 
er in seinem Werken uberraschende Beweise von einer gut en Belesenheit der Alten; auch 
die moderne Literatur mag ihm schon hier erschlossen worden sein." Grosse is under a 
misconception as to the nature of Harvard College in 1657. Nothing is more certain than 
the fact that modern literature was not disclosed to him there. 

103 Chalmers, op. cit., p. 263. 

104 Fogg, op. cit., IV, 189-190. 



28 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

England until August, 1661/°^ there is reason to believe that he 
would have been prepared to take the first degree. It is difficult 
to see that Crowne's three years in America had any permanent 
effect upon him. His works show no recollections of this period of 
his life.^^^ On the other hand, the toryism of his political views, in 
opposition to the political allegiance of his father, may have been 
his normal reaction against the theocratical ideas which prevailed 
in England and America during his youth. It is more than likely, 
furthermore, that his strong opposition to Catholicism may be 
traced to the Protestant theological training which he received at 
Harvard College. 

The next ten years of Crowne's life after his return to Eng- 
land are much more obscure than the period which we have just 
been considering. When Col. Crowne returned to America (prob- 
ably in the late spring of 1662), he left his son behind in London; 
and thereafter the lad was forced to struggle for a living on his 
own account. His father had sunk the earnings of his best years 
in the Nova Scotian adventure, and when he failed to receive fair 
treatment from Temple, he was in no position to be of financial 
assistance to his son. Dennis gives us our only clew to the young 
man's life during these years, and in view of the inaccuracy of his 
earlier statements, we can only repeat his account for what it is 
worth. He says of Crowne, ''Necessity, upon his first Arrival here, 
oblig'd him to become a Gentleman-Usher to an old Independent 
Lady. But he soon grew as weary of that precise Office as he had 
been of the Discipline of Nova Scotia."^°^ As a result he turned 
to literary activities and wrote a prose romance, entitled Pdndion and 
Amphigeneia, or the Coy Lady of Thessalia. In the dedication he 
calls it the offspring of his vacant hours, and says he "fancyed it" 
when he was scarcely twenty. We have already disposed of Grosse's 
attempt to date Crowne's birth from this latter statement.^°^ It is 

105 Albert Matthews, Harvard Commencement Days 1642-1916. Publications of The 
Colonial Society of Massachusetts, XVIII, 379, conjectures that Aug. 13th was the com- 
mencement date in 1661. 

106 Grosse, pp. 9-10, is of the opinion that in later life Crowne looked back with 
longing to the scenes of his "boyhood," and that when in 1697 he made a further effort 
to recover his estate in America he did it "dass der Besitz seines Erbteiles es ihm moglich 
machen wtirde, dort ohne materielle Sorgen dichtend und traumend inmitten einer herrlichen 
Natur zu leben." Thereupon he quotes Crowne's statement, "The loss of it has made 
England a desert to me." As a matter of fact Crowne had no idea of spending his last 
years in America "poetizing without material worries and dreaming in the midst of a 
beautiful nature." "My inheritance," he says to the contrary, "tho' it lay in the deserts 
of America would have enabled me, if I could have kept it, to have liv'd at my ease in 
these beautiful parts o' the world; the loss of it has made England a desert to me." {Works, 
rV, 348. The italics are mine.) 

107 Dennis, I, 49. 

108 See above, pp. 23-24. 



LIFE AXD DRAMATIC WORKS OF TOHX CROWXE 29 

possible, indeed, that Crowne's romance was written in 1661, the 
first year after his return from Xew England, but, as we have seen, 
it is likely that the youthful author had some considerable diffi- 
culty in finding a publisher who was willing to print the first- 
born of his fancy. At any rate it was not published until January 
1665.^°^ 

Sir Walter Raleigh, one of the historians of the English novel 
and romance, comments as follows on Pandion and Amphigeneia-'' 

"It is no better, in some respects it is worse, than the work 
of the idlest titled amateurs. The first hundred pages neither 
begin the main story nor prepare the way for it; they offer 
sundry minor stories to the reader while he is waiting. . . . 
When the story begins it is carried on in a halting intermittent 
fashion, and it never finishes . . . This paralysis of the 
story is so common a disease of the heroic romance as almost 
to serve for definition."^^° 
Crowne's work was inspired seemingly by the great vogue which 
the heroic romance was then enjoying in England. Even before the 
appearance of Pandion and Aniphigeneia, the long, lumbering ro- 
mances of ^Madeleine de Scuder}* and La Calprenede had been 
translated into English and were being read with avidity by the 
courtiers after their return from exile. Already the exaggerated 
heroes and heroines and the exotic settings were being used by the 
playw'rights and were being developed into the new type of heroic 
drama. Other influences besides those of the current vogue of the 
French heroic romances, however, are to be noticed in the young 
author's work. Raleigh continues, 

*Tn a preface to the reader he is careful to condemn all 
the faults of romance-writing which he subsequently exempli- 
fies in his tale. A writer should not 'bolster up a crooked in- 
vention with fungous words,' nor make a fiction 'an hospital 
of lame conceits' . . . The book is interesting as another 
illustration of the powerful and abiding influence of Sidney 
on the English romance. ... In the coarse and clumsy 
comedy of Anus and Daphnis, introduced as an episode in 
Pandion, Crowne follows the hapless example of the weakest 
part of the iVrcadia. Ever and again he appropriates shame- 
lessly in his description without improvement. . . . Even 
Pamela's prayer finds its counterpart in the prayer of Glycera. 
. . . Sidney is not the only author that Crowne draws 
from. In the poem that occurs incidentally in Pandion and 

i09Arber, Stationers' Register, 1640-1708, II, 351. 

110 Walter Raleigh, The English Novel, p. 99. Crowne's Pandion has been inaccessible 
to me; I have been forced, therefore, to depend upon the criticism of others concerning it. 



30 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Amphigeneia the following stanza will show how the heroic 
school could improve on George Herbert: — 

'Sweet day, so calm, so cool, so bright, 
Thou hast expelled the dusky night, 
And Sol begins to mount on high. 
And marry Tellus to the sky/ "^^^ 

Professor Saintsbury agrees with Raleigh about the borrow- 
ing from the Arcadia, and adds his own comment : "The fact is that 
this romance was foredoomed to inefficiency. It was not a genuine 
kind at all: but a sort of pajtchwork of imitations of imitations — 
a mule which, unlike the natural animal, was itself bred, and bred 
in and in, of mules for generations back. It was true to no time, to 
no country, to no system of manners, life, or thought."^^^ M. 
Jusserand is in practical agreement. He says the main defects of 
heroical literature, ''bombast in the ideas and bad taste in the ex- 
pressions," are pushed to an extreme in Crowne's romance.^" 

In the period immediately following the Restoration the most 
promising field of literary activity for an aspiring young writer 
was the drama. The type was then in a stage of transition and 
offered possibilities afforded in no other branch of literature. Prac- 
tically all the younger generation of writers such as Dryden, Ether- 
edge, Wycherley, Sir Robert Howard, Sedley, and Orrery, were 
experimenting with plays. It was natural, therefore, that Crowne 
should also try his hand at playwriting. At just what time he began 
his experiments we cannot tell, but we may probably date his 
earliest efforts late in the first decade after the Restoration. In 
the dedication to his first play, Juliana, Crowne declares that it is 
"the first-born of its kind" which he "ever laboured with to per- 
fection." This implies one or more earlier attempts which re- 
mained unfinished. It is apparent, moreover, that Juliana was 
written some time before its production in the summer of 1671, 
since Crowne says that it was "pen'd in a crowd, and hurry of 
business and travel ; interrupted and disorder 'd by many unfortunate, 
not to say insolent affairs, of a quite different nature.""* There is 
no indication of the nature of his business during this period, but 
the remark is suggestive. We may suppose, perhaps, that his 

111 Raleigh, op. cit., pp. 99-101. 

112 Geo. Saintsbury, The English Novel, p. 47. 

113 J. J. Jusserand, The English Novel in the Time of Shakespeare, p. 389. A wood- 
cut or "sculpture" from Pandion is reprinted by Jusserand, p. 347. 

114 Works, I, 15. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 31 

travels led him to Paris and gave him his first real knowledge of 
the French language and literature. At this time he may well have 
witnessed the performance of several of Moliere's comedies and 
stored up his experience for future use. 

III. THE BEGINNING DRAMATIST 1670-1677. 

With the beginning of the 1670 period Crowne associated him- 
self actively with the theatrical world. It will be recalled that his 
father's estate in America had been given to the French Dy the 
treaty of Breda in 1667 and relinquished by Temple to them in 
1670. As Crowne could no longer hope for financial assistance 
from his father, he cast in his lot with the Duke's Theatre and be- 
came a playwright. His earliest play, Juliana, or the Princess of 
Poland, shared the fate of many first productions at this time. It 
was brought out by the Duke's Servants — Betterton and his associ- 
ates — in 1671, while they were still playing in Lincoln's-Inn-Fields. 
Crowne himself ascribes its poor reception to the time of year — 
the long vacation, when the courtly theatre-goers were mostly absent 
from London, and this circumstance doubtless had its effect; but 
the piece certainly deserved to fail because of its confused plot, if 
for no other reason. Juliana is a romantic comedy. The scene is 
laid in Poland apparently with a view to capitalizing the public 
interest which Englishmen then felt in that country. 

During the delays which doubtless occurred between the com- 
position of Juliana and its acceptance by Betterton for the Duke's 
Company, Crowne must have written his second play. The History 
of Charles the Eighth of France was more fortunate than its prede- 
cessor in the circumstances of its production. The Duke's Company 
removed from Lincoln's-Inn-Fields to its new theatre in Dorset 
Garden in November 1671, and according to the prompter Downes, 
Charles the Eighth was the first new play to be given there. 'Tt was 
all new Cloath'd" and ran for six successive days, with occasional 
performances later.^^** It was the new playwright's first effort in 
the heroic drama, the vogue of which had reached its height a 
year or two earlier in Dry den's Conquest of Granada (1669-70). 

For the two years following the production of Charles the 
Eighth there is no record of further dramatic composition on the 
part of Crowne. Early in 1674, however, he was at work on a 
prose translation of Racine's Andromaque. An anonymous young 

115 Roscius Anglicanus, pp. 31-32. 



32 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

gentleman had previously rendered this in poor heroic couplets with 
the hope of seeing it brought upon the English stage, but the play 
was not acceptable and to Crowne was assigned the task of making 
it stageworthy. He turned the greater part of it into prose and it 
was played in the summer of 1674, but with ill success. Piqued by 
its failure, Crowne hastened to explain his part in it, in the preface 
prefixed to the printed quarto. 

About this time Crowne became implicated, together with Dry- 
den and Shadwell, in a literary quarrel with Elkanah Settle. Settle's 
heroic tragedy. The Empress of Morocco, had been acted twice 
before the king in the private theatre at Whitehall in 1669 or 1670, 
and in 1671 it was presented publicly at the new Duke's Theatre in 
Dorset Garden.^^^ where, according to Dennis, it was played "for a 
month together."^^^ Its great success led the publishers, when they 
printed it in 1673, to adorn it with "sculptures" and to fix its price 
at two shillings, which was double the usual charge for play-books. 
In the dedication, moreover, Settle took occasion to refer satirically 
to Dryden and the ill success of his latest play, The Assignation 
(1672). Dryden was already jealous of the unmerited popularity of 
his younger rival, and he was not slow in retorting. In his reply he 
received the assistance of Shadwell and Crowne, who had no par- 
ticular occasion for a quarrel with Settle, except his popularity. 
The result was an anonymous quarto pamphlet, entitled Notes and 
Observations on the Empress of Morocco, Or some few Errata's 
to he Printed instead of the Sculptures with the Second Edition of 
that Play, published in 1674. This somewhat lengthy attack con- 
sisted of a preface, "Erratas in the Epistle," notes upon the plot and 
management of the play, and a postscript. It was made up mainly 
of abuse and quibbles. Settle at once prepared a reply which he 
called Notes and Observations on The Empress of Morocco Revised; 
With Some fezv Errata's to he Printed instead of the ''Postscript", 
with the next Edition of the Conquest of Granada. He unhesitat- 
ingly ascribed the book to its three actual authors. "With very 
little conjuration," he remarks in his preface, "by those three re- 
markable Qualities of Railing, Boasting and Thieving I found a 
Dryden in the Frontispiece. Then going through the Preface, I 
observ'd the drawing of a Fools Picture to be the design of the 

116 F. C. Brown, Elkanah Settle, pp. 11, 13. 

117 John Dennis, Remarks upon Mr. Pope's Translation of Homer, Preface. Quoted 
by Brown, p. 14. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 33 

whole piece, and reflecting on the Painter I considered that probably 
his Pamphlet might be like his Plays, not to be written without 
help. And according to expectation I discovered the Author of 
Epsome- Wells, and the Author of Pandion and Amphigenia lent 
their assistance. How ! Three to One thought I ? and three Gentle- 
men of such disagreeing Qualifications in one Club: The First a 
Man that has had wit, but is past it; tbe Second that has it, if he 
can keep it, and the Third that neither has, nor is ever like to have 
it." Settle rightly designates Dryden as the promoter of the pamph- 
let, and thinks that Crowne may have engaged in it "out of a Vain 
Glory of being in Print, knowing himself to be so little a Reptile in 
Poetry, that hee's beholding to a Lampoon for giving the World to 
know, that there is such a writer in being."^^® Some of Settle's 
friends advised him to reply to all three, but he says of Crowne 
that "he cannot be well attacqued ; his Plays being fortified against 
Objections. For like the Leper that from Head to Foot was all 
Deformity, I defie any man to meet with above one fault in a whole 
Play of his."^^« 

The trio of attacking playwrights had underestimated Settle's 
popularity, and they came off but lamely from the encounter. The 
reflections which their pamphlet cast upon those who had praised 
The Empress of Morocco probably had much to do with causing 
Rochester and Buckingham to support Settle in the controversy, 
since Rochester had favored its presentation at Whitehall.^^^ The 
exact shares which each of the three collaborators had in Notes and 
Observations can probably never be settled. Dryden is generally 
given credit for the preface and postscript, while Settle assigns 
the notes on the fourth act to Shadwell.^^^ Many years later, 
in 1698, when the quarrel was only a memory, Crowne wrote 
in the prefatory epistle to Caligula, "In my notes on a play 
call'd the Empress of Morocco, I call 'em mine because above 
three parts of four were written by me, I gave vent to more 
ill-nature in me than I will do again. "^^^ It may be that this 
remark, like Wycherley's statement to Pope concerning the dates 
at which his comedies were written, is only a reminiscent half- 

118 [Settle], Notes and Observations on The Empress of Morocco Revised. Preface. 
Quoted by Brown, pp. 57-58. 

119 Brown, op. cit., pp. 56-57. 

120 Ibid., p. 55, note 1. 

121 Works, IV, 353. 



34 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

truth, but Crowne would scarcely have penned it if he had not 
had a considerable share in the abusive pamphlet.^^^ 

The popularity of Settle and the prominence which he had 
gained among the young artists of the town as a result of his suc- 
cessful encounter with the poet laureate soon caused the fickle 
Rochester to withdraw his favor and to bestow it upon the man 
whom Settle had abused in turn as "so little a 'Reptile in Poetry' " ; 
that is, upon Crowne. In the summer of 1674 Princess Mary, the 
elder daughter of the Duke of York, desired a masque for a court 
performance, and Rochester procured Crowne to write the piece. 
In this move he had the double motive, as we shall see later, of 
curbing the vainglorious Settle, and of mortifying Dryden, against 
whom he had a grudge because the latter was under the patronage 
of the Earl of Mulgrave.^^^ The result was Crowne's masque 
Calisto; or the Chaste Nimph, elaborately performed by the two 
princesses and other young noblewomen at court in December and 
January, 1674 and 1675. The production of Calisto was a note- 
worthy event in the life of the struggling dramatist. The masque 
is in no wise remarkable as a dramatic poem, but it brought Crowne 
into the place of prominence in literary circles which Settle had 
held but recently. It also marks the beginning of Crowne's rela- 
tions as a playwright with Charles II ; by means of it he experienced 
for the first time "the princely bounty" of the Merry Monarch.^^* 

In the following year, 1675, Crowne wrote his first comedy, 
The Countrey Wit. It was composed in prose in conformity with 
the practice which Etherege, Wycherley, Shadwell and others had 
established for the new comedy of manners. It also follows the 
contemporary fashion in drawing heavily on Moliere. The produc- 
tion of The Countrey Wit at the Duke's Theatre was marked by 
greater success than Crowne had hitherto achieved at the public 
playhouse. The play was to the liking of Charles II, and Crowne 
was again honored with his favor.^^*^ 

In spite of the success of his first comedy, Crowne returned 
to the serious drama in his next play. During the year 1676 he 
was engaged in writing a two-part heroic drama, entitled The De- 
struction of Jerusalem. The two plays were acted by the King's 

122 Brown, p. 55, note 1, is of the opinion that "in spite of the many stupid things 
throughout the pamphlet, one is forced to conclude that Dryden had much to do with the 
entire piece." 

123 See below, Chapter II, p. 78. 

124 Works, I, 239. 

125 Works, III, 17. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 85 

Company at the Theatre Royal in the spring of 1677, and met with as 
extraordinary applause as had greeted Dryden's Conquest of Gran^ 
ada in 1669-70 and Settle's Empress of Morocco in 1671. Hereto- 
fore Crowne's plays had been written for the Duke's Theatre; but 
Betterton's company refused his new play — doubtless because they 
had already accepted Otway's Titus and Berenice,^^^ and Crowne 
had to apply at the other theatre. Its success piqued the Duke's 
men, who regarded Crowne as their own property, and the two 
companies clashed over this and other matters. As a result Killi- 
grew, Hart, Burt, Goodman, and Mohun of the Theatre Royal 
complained to the Lord Chamberlain that they were unfairly treated. 
Fortunately this complaint has been preserved and throws con- 
siderable light upon the conditions under wbich Crowne was writ- 
ing during this period. The early part of the document recites a 
complaint against Dryden and Lee for giving their tragedy Oedipus 
to the Duke's Theatre when they were under contract with the 
King's Company. It then continues : 

"Mr. Crowne being under a like agreement with the Duke's 
House, writt a play called The Destruction of Jerusalem, and 
being forced by their refusall of it to bring it to us, the said 
Company compelled us after the studying of it, and a vast 
expence in scenes and cloathes to buy off their clayme, by 
paying all the pension he had received from them; amounting 
to one hundred and twelve pounds paid by the King's Company, 
besides neere forty pounds he the said Mr. Crowne paid out of 
his owne pocket."^^^ 

From this document it is evident that the services of Crowne 
were secured to the Duke's Company by a sort of retaining fee 
or pension, which in his case seems to have amounted to 112 /. a 
year. How long before 1677 this arrangement had been in effect 
we cannot say, but it doubtless dated back to the beginning of 1675 
when the playwright became prominent on account of his introduc- 
tion to the Court by Rochester. Indeed it is possible, though hardly 
likely, that the arrangement may have been effected as early as 1672, 
when Charles the Eighth was played with success, since the Duke's 
Company produced all of Crowne's plays in the next few years. 
The sum of 112 /., however, does not represent, as Grosse thinks, 
the poet's total annual income.^^® In those years in which the plays 
were being acted, he received also the receipts of the third day's 

126 See below, Chapter II, p. 93. 

127 The . . . Prose Works of John Dryden, ed. Malone, I, Pt. I, 73-75. 

128 Grosse, p. 14. 



36 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

performance, which according to Alalone amounted generally to 
about 70 /. In addition the author received about 20 or 25 /. for 
his play from the publisher, and another 5 /. from the nobleman 
whom he flattered in the dedication.^^^ Thus in the productive years 
of this early period Crowne must have had an income of 200 /. 

In spite of his pension and third-day benefit, however, the 
position of the Restoration playwright was subject to a considerable 
extent to the fickle favor of the young and oftentimes very clever 
noblemen who were themselves dabblers in poetry and drama, and 
who favored or opposed their more dependent fellow craftsmen as 
their capricious natures directed. John Wilmot, the profligate Earl 
of Rochester, was especially fickle as a patron. As early as 1672 
Crowne had dedicated his Charles the Eighth to him, and two years 
later, as we have seen, Rochester introduced him at court and secured 
for him the commission of masque-writer, mainly for the purpose 
of debasing Settle and galling Dryden. In the years immediately 
following Crowne had achieved notable successes in The Countrey 
IVit and especially in The Destruction of Jerusalem. Thereupon 
Rochester became jealous of his newest poet-puppet, and trans- 
ferred his favor to Otway. Such at least is the testimony of a 
letter prefixed to an edition of Rochester's works, and supposed 
to have been written by St. Evremond to the Duchess of Mazarin. 
The part referring to Rochester and Crowne reads : 

"But when Mr. Crowne's 'Destruction of Jerusalem' had 
met with as wild and unaccountable success as Mr. Dryden's 
'Conquest of Granada', his Lordship withdrew his favour as if 
he would be still in contradiction to the town."^^° 

At all events Rochester satirized Crowne in the following year, 
1678, in An Allusion to the Tenth Satyr of the First Book of Horace. 
After saying of Dryden that 

"The heavy Mass 
That stuffs up his loose Volumes must not pass ;" 
he adds 

"For by that Rule I might aswel admit 
Crown's tedious Sense for Poetry and Wit."^^^ 

129 Malone-Boswell, Variorum Shakespeare, Historical Account of the English Stage, 
III, 162-164 note 8. On pp. 173-174, note 1, Malone quotes Gildon in his Laws of Poetry 
(1721) as observing that "after the Restoration, when the two houses struggled for the 
favour of the town, the taking poets were secured to either house by a sort of retaining 
fee which seldom or never amounted to more than forty shillings a week, nor was that <rf 
any long continuance." Malone thinks, however, that Gildon underrated their profits. 

130 Preface to The Works of the Earl of Rochester, Roscommon, and Dorset, London, 
1731, quoted by Maidraent and Logan, Works, II, 218. The original volume is not acces- 
sible to me, 

131 J. E. Spingarn, Critical Essays of the Seventeenth Century, II, 282. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 37 

In another satire entitled Session of the Poets and generally as- 
cribed to Rochester, although it appears in the works of the 
Duke of Buckingham as written by him, under the title, "A Trial 
of the Poets for the Bays, in Imitation of a Satyr in Boileau, some- 
thing of Crowne's personal appearance and dress at this period are 
revealed : 

"In the numerous Crowd that incompast him roimd 
Little Starched Johnny C — at his elbow he foimd, 
His Crevat-string new Iron'd, he gently did stretch 
His lilly white Hand out, the Lawrel to reach, 
Alledging that he had most right to the Bays, 
For writing Romances, and sh — ting of Plays : 
Apollo rose up, and gravely confest. 
Of all Men that writ, his Talent was best ; 
For since Pain and Dishonour Mans Life only dam. 
The greatest Felicity Mankind can claim, 
Is to want Sense of Smart, and to be past Sense of Shame; 
And to perfect his Bliss in Poetical Rapture, 
He bid him be dull to the end of the Chapter."^^^ 
From these passages we can gather that John Crowne was a man of 
small stature, and unusually particular about his personal appear- 
ance. There is other satirical testimony, however, that the play- 
wright's life was not one of great felicity. Buckingham in A Con- 
solatory Epistle to Captain Julian, the Muses News-Monger, in 
his Confinement comforts the imprisoned scribbler by referring to 
the wretched state of Dryden, gentle George (Etherege), Otway, 
D'Urfey, Shadwell, Settle, and Lee, as well as to that of Crowne: 

"Poor Crown too has his Third Dales mix'd with Gall, 
He Uves so ill, he hardly lives at all."^^* 

The misery and want which pursued Otway and Lee must also 
have been the fate of Crowne at times in the years before he knew 
the favor of Charles 11. 

IV. THE TORY PLAYWRIGHT; EFFORTS TO SECURE 

AN ESTATE IN AMERICA. 

The favor which Crowne had come to enjoy from King Charles 

as a result of Calisto and The Countrey Wit was no doubt pleasing 

to his father on the other side of the Atlantic. Hope of securing 

182 The Miscellaneous Works of the Duke of Buckingham, 1707, I, 41. 
183 /&»U, 20-23. 



38 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

compensation for the loss of his estate in the Penobscot region, 
so that he might leave behind a better provision for his children, 
led the elder Crowne to suggest to his literary son that he capitalize 
his favor with the Merry Monarch and petition for the proprietor- 
ship of Mounthope, near the Plymouth settlements. Col. Crowne's 
residence at Prudence Island during King Philip's War was per- 
haps responsible for the selection of Mounthope. Accordingly, in 
January, 1679, the younger Crowne petitioned the King and Privy 
Council in behalf of his father for the desolate and uninhabited 
Mounthope in compensation for the loss of the Nova Scotian prop- 
erty.^^* The matter was referred to the committee of Trade and 
Plantations, and an investigation was set on foot to determine the 
extent of the land and the title. Letters of inquiry were sent to the 
several New England colonies,^^^ and on July 1st the governor and 
council of New Plymouth replied that the land was about seven 
thousand acres in extent and had been conquered in the late Indian 
war from Sachem Philip. Moreover, it was unquestionably within 
the limits of the New Plymouth patent. They therefore begged the 
king not to deprive them of it.^^® Upon receipt of this letter the 
Lords of Trade and Plantations recommended that New Plymouth 
be allowed to continue in possession of the lands and agreed that 
no part of them should be given to Crowne, "whatever his preten- 
sions to the King's favour on some other occasion."^^^ 

Despairing of obtaining Mounthope, the playwright presented 
another petition in February 1680, asking for "a tract of land called 
Boston Neck^^^ or such a number of acres of the Narragansett 
Country (which is His Majesty's right by ancient donation of the 
Indians) as may afford his father, family, and himself a competent 
subsistence. "^^^ In March the Lords of Trade and Plantation took 
up the petition, but nothing came of it.^'*° 

During the same spring in which Crowne petitioned for Mount- 
hope his next play, The Ambitious Statesman, was produced. This 
was his most pretentious effort thus far, but it was not successful 

\^i State Papers, Colonial, 1677-80, p. 319. 

135 Ibid., p. 328. 

136 Ibid., pp. 384-385. 

137 Ibid., pp. 435-436. 

138 Boston Neck is the rich strip of shore between the Pettaquamscutt river and the 
western entrance to Providence Bay, and north of the inlet. It was then a part of the 
Narragansett country. Cf. Edgar M. Bacon, Narragansett Bay Its Historic and Romantic 
Association nad Picturesque Setting, p. 248. 

139 State Papers, Colonial, 1677-80, p. 477. 

140 Ibid., p. 492. 



I 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 39 

on the stage. Its failure was due in part no doubt to the unsettled 
conditions in England. Only a short while before, the so-called 
Popish Plot agitation had begun, and during the spring of 1679, 
when Crowne's new tragedy was produced, London was in the 
midst of the murder trials which grew out of the accusations of 
Titus Oates. It is not to be wondered at, then, if the villainous 
character of the Constable in Crowne's play failed to attract a 
public which really believed that there was a monstrous plot afoot 
to murder Protestants and reestablish Catholicism in England. 

As a direct effect of the Popish Plot there was a sharp cleavage 
in the political views of Englishmen which resulted in the formation 
of the two political parties, Tories and Whigs. The Whigs rallied 
round the Earl of Shaftesbury and tried to make capital of the 
perjuries of Oates in order to embarrass Stuart despotism and 
more especially to secure the exclusion of the Catholic Duke of 
York from the succession. The Tories were not less ardent sup- 
porters of Protestantism as represented by the Established Church, 
but they would not consent to limit the king's prerogative. The 
conflict was very bitter, and almost threatened civil war. There- 
fore, Crowne, who was now securely in the favor of King Charles, 
and who looked back with shudderings to the strife of the common- 
wealth period, took occasion to warn his fellow-countrymen of the 
dire effects of civil discord by adapting parts of the Shakespearean 
trilogy of Henry VI in a play which he called The Miseries of 
Civil-War. It was produced at the Duke's Theatre in 1680. Not 
only was the play political in purpose; it was also in part a satire 
upon Catholicism. In his previous tragedy. The Ambitious States- 
man, Crowne had begun his opposition to the Catholics — an opposi- 
tion which was to continue uppermost in his mind for the next ten 
years. In 1681 he adapted another play from an earlier part of 
the Shakespearean Henry VI. On this occasion his main purpose 
was to satirize the Catholics, or as he himself put it, to add "a little 
vinegar against the Pope." Neither of these adaptations, however, 
served to increase Crowne's reputation as a playwright. His next 
play, Thyestes, brought out in 1681, showed still his dependence 
upon older drama for his substance, but it is a far worthier en- 
deavor than his rehashing of Henry VI. In his conduct of the plot, 
at least, he improved upon the grim and revolting tragedy of Seneca. 

The years from 1680 to 1683 saw many playwrights engaged 



40 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

in the conflict between the two parties, and expending their efforts 
in veiled or openly abusive satirical plays against their opponents. 
Ajt this time Crowne was an ardent Tory, and thus in 1682 he 
was occupied in writing perhaps the most completely political play 
of the group. City Politiques, a prose comedy, was acted at the 
Theatre Royal probably at the beginning of 1683, but not until it had 
been long held up in the office of the Lord Chamberlain, Henry 
Bennet, who, according to Dennis, was secretly a Whig, and there- 
fore hindered every effort at stage satire against his party. Dennis 
is authority also for the statement that Crowne at length grew 
impatient of the delay, and relying upon his favor with Charles 
II, secured a royal mandate to have the play acted.^*^ Most of the 
major characters are thinly veiled caricatures of leading Whigs, 
and although Crowne denied the charge of impersonation, his de- 
fence, as we shall see later, does not bear close scrutiny. Inci- 
dentally Crowne paid the interest on an old score by satirizing El- 
kanah Settle among other Whig poets in the person of Craffy.^*^ 

City Politiques is undeniably a salacious play, but it is a clever 
political satire as well, and must have been pleasing to the Tories 
and to the king himself. Therefore in 1684, when Shaftesbury was 
dead and his opponents were enjoying their power, Crowne chose 
a favorable moment to plead with the king for a reward for his 
services. He had ample testimony of the enmity which the Whigs 
bore him for his satire against their leaders. He was weary, more- 
over, of the uncertainty which confronted even his best efforts as a 
playwright. Unlike Shakespeare and the elder race of titanic drama- 
tists, Crowne did not write plays because he loved the theatre, but 
because that was the literary field which offered the best opportuni- 
ties for a livelihood during the Restoration period. He saw before 
him the examples of Etherege and Wycherley, talented playwrights, 
who had forsaken the theatre at the crest of their popularity and 
lived admired in the midst of the sparkling society of the court. 
Although Crowne had a deep dislike for the commotion and bustle 
of the court,^*^ he was determined to secure his elder years against 
the wretchedness which might otherwise be his fortune. With this 
in mind, and conscious also that the government owed him some- 
thing for the loss of his father's estate, he asked King Charles 

141 Dennis, I, 49-50. 

142 See below, Chapter II, p. 131. 

143 Dennis, I, SO. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 41 

for an office which would give him a comfortable income. Accord- 
ing to Dennis the king was willing to grant the request, but being 
a great lover of merry comedies, as Crowne himself testifies,^** he 
insisted that the playwright should write him another play. Crowne 
attempted to excuse himself on the ground that he was a very 
slow plotter, but the king supplied him with Moreto's No Puede Ser 
and there was nothing to do but to comply. Oldmixon is authority 
for the statement that the composition of the piece proceeded under 
the supervision of the king,^*^ who bade Crowne continue even when 
an earlier adaptation of the Spanish play was discovered. At 
length Sir Courtly Nice was completed and placed in rehearsal. 
Good success seemed to await it, and the author looked forward 
to the fulfilment of the king's promise. But Crowne was born under 
an unlucky star. On the very day of the last rehearsal the profli- 
gate king was seized with a fit and three days later he died. With 
his death perished Crowne's favor at court and the possibility of 
his advancement to a position of independent means. His disap- 
pointment must have been very keen, and even the remarkable 
success of Sir Courtly Nice must have given him cold comfort. 
Charles II died on February 6, 1685, and not long afterwards, 
apparently, the poet mourned his great loss in a little poem On the 
Lamented Death of our Late Gratious Sovereign, King Charles 
the IL of ever Blessed Memory. The couplets are in the customary 
laudatory vein, and are of no particular merit. One feels that the 
sentiments are sincere, however, in such lines as these: — 
"Thro' my cold dark frame, a voice does spread 
To my numb'd Ear, and says in Charles I'm dead." 
With the accession of James II the comedy on which Crowne 
had expended his best effort to please the Merry Monarch — ^now 
jesting no more — was the first of the new plays to be acted. Its 
great success and continued popularity for nearly a hundred years 
mark it as Crowne's main contribution to the drama of his age. 
If Charles had lived and fulfilled his promise. Sir Courtly Nice 
might have brought his connection with the theatre to a successful 
close, just as Sir Foplin^ Flutter was the last work of Etherege; 
but fate ruled otherwise, and with 1685 the short period of Crowne's 
best achievement draws to an end. 

144 Works, III, 254. Dedication to Sir Courtly Nice. 

145 John Oldmixon, The History of England during the Reigns of the Royal House 
of Stuarts, p. 690. 



42 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 



V. PLAYWRITING AGAIN FOR A LIVELIHOOD. 

In the years immediately following the death of his royal 
patron, Crowne produced nothing. He tells us that during this time 
he was the victim of a tedious sickness.^*® It was not until 1688 
that he came forward with a new play, — a tragedy. He was aware, 
he says, that the taste of the time favored comedy, but his physical 
condition and his gloomy spirits put him in no humor for the 
lighter form of drama.^*^ Darius was brought out in the spring 
of 1688, but ill-luck still dogged Crowne's footsteps. At the first 
performance Mrs. Barry became ill while acting the part of the 
heroine, and the piece fell dead. The author's only consolation was 
in the extraordinarily large receipts of the third day by reason of 
the presence of King James. ^*'' 

Not many months after the representation of Darius, the na- 
tional resentment against the eflforts of James to catholicize England 
burst forth, and with the arrival of William of Orange the last 
Stuart king was forced to flee the realm. With his departure the 
animosity which Crowne cherished for Catholicism and which he 
had of late been forced to suppress, blazed forth more ardently 
than ever, and in 1689 he wrote a new comedy severely satirical of 
the Catholic practices of the late reign. The English Frier was 
played probably in the autumn of 1689, but Crowne's enemies among 
the Whigs whom he had satirized in City Politiques and the Cath- 
olics whom he now satirized caused such an uproar that the play 
was withdrawn to keep peace in the theatre. 

The English Frier was Crowne's severest arraignment of the 
Catholic religion and its priests, but its suppression by the actors did 
not cause him to remain silent long on the subject of his animosity. 
His next effort, however, was not in the field of the drama. In 
January, 1692, he published an heroic poem in four cantos, entitled 
Daeneids, or the Noble Labours of the Great Dean of Notre-Dame 
in Paris. The work is in part a translation of Boileau's Lutrin, 
but Crowne made no effort to reproduce the French poem in its 
entirety.^*® In his dedication to the Earl of Mulgrave he explains 
his attitude towards his original : "I am well assured the Lutrin 
pleases Your Lordship, but I may doubt of my management of it; 

146 Works, III, 370. 

147 See below, Chapter II, p. 146. 

148 For Grosse's discussion of the Daeneids, see his monograph, pp. 94-102. 



LIFE AXD DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWXE 43 

for I treat it as an English Privateer would do a French Prize, 
great part of it, I fling away, and I dash-brew and disguise the rest 
as I think good." A comparison of Le Luirin and the Daeneids 
leads one to the conclusion that the poet's doubts concerning the 
handling of the French poem were well founded. Boileau's work 
is a true mock-heroic poem with much of the supernatural ma- 
chinery used by the old narrative poets. Epic mannerisms are clever- 
ly burlesqued, and the touch of the skilled artist is manifest througli- 
out. Crowne's poem, on the contrar}^ has few mock-epic traits. 
The goddesses Discord and Night he uses only because they are 
absolutely necessary to the story. He reduces the elaborate mock- 
heroic introduction to a few lines. He fails to grasp the significance 
of the heroic descriptions of the contestants and he unpardonably 
omits the splendid battle of the books in Chant V, 

Still, one must remember that Crowne's purpose was not to 
compose a mock-epic, but rather to satirize the religious enemies 
of his country. He ventured to adapt Boileau's poem, so he tells 
us in the dedication, "because it exposes to contempt Men, who are 
the Antipodes of good Sence ; Priests who advance Nonsence above 
Reason, make Trifles of the most Solemn ]Matters, and Solemn 
Things of Trifles ; are idle in the great Affairs of their Calling and 
busie in Impertinence."^*^ To this end he seizes every opportunity 
to emphasize and enlarge upon the epicurean taste of the Romish 
clergy, their indolence and the hoUowness of their ecclesiastical 
forms. A few other changes of less importance are to be noted. 
The names and to some extent the characters of the three cham- 
pions selected by lot to place the choir-desk (le Lutrin) in such a 
position that it will conceal the proud Chanter, are changed. For 
the golden-locked barber, Lamour, whose wife pleads with him to 
forsake the guest, Crowne has substituted Minnum, a handsome 
young singing-man, whose amorous gallantry has been the ruin of 
many a maiden. The other two champions are renamed Trole and 
Verger in place of Brontin and Boirude. The name of the latter 
the English author substitutes for Sidrac in the part of the Dean's 
friendly adviser. 

Crosse is of the opinion that Crowne heightens the comic effects 
of Boileau's mock-epic,^^^ but I cannot agree with him. On the con- 
trar}^ it seems to me that the omission of the burlesquing descriptions 

149 The Daeneids, Dedication. 

150 Grosse, p. 102. 



44 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

of the contestants and the battle of the books together with the 
neglect of the supernatural machinery employed by Bodleau de- 
creases the comic effect to a marked degree. Contemporary com- 
ment appraised the poem as dull. Edward Ward wrote in 1692 : 
"Tho' ten times duller every line appears, 
Than Crowns late Daeneids, or John Bunyans Verse, 
Yet his flat Nonsense will the World prefer 
Before the Lines of Cowley, Rochester, 
Waller or Denham.''^^^ 
In the same year in which the Daeneids appeared, 1692, Crowne 
came forward with another comic poem, The History of the Famous 
and Passionate Love between a Fair Noble Parisian Lady and a 
Beautiful Young Singing-Man. Like its predecessor, this appeared 
without Crowne's name on the title-page, but unlike the Daeneids, 
the dedication is unsigned. However, as Grosse has pointed out,^**^ 
Crowne's authorship is proved by a reference to the Daeneids in the 
epistle to the reader. The introduction of Minnum, the hero of 
The History of the Famous and Passionate Love, as one of the 
three champions of the Dean in the Daeneids in the place of the 
barber Lamour, shows that Crowne had the material for his later 
poem in mind while he was imitating Le Lutrin. Like the Daeneids, 
the new poem was written in part as a satire against the Catholic 
clergy. 

The story of The History of the Famous and Passionate Love 
may be given very briefly. A noble and beautiful Parisian lady 
marries a Marquis because of his position in society. She has no 
love for him and he seeks diversion elsewhere. In revenge she looks 
about for a lover and is charmed by the manly voice of Minnum, 
a young singing-man. She fights against her desires, but in her 
wretchedness confesses her passion to her maid who acts as go- 
between. Minnum is engaged to marry Lavinia, niece to the Dean 
of Notre-Dame, and the Dean, hearing rumors of Minnum's in- 
trigue, forces him to marry Lavinia or lose his office. The Mar- 
quise pleads with her lover, but he is obdurate; and cursing him, 
she returns to her husband. Minnum later feels a return of the 
old passion for her, but the Marquise spurns him, and he marries 
Lavinia. 

151 Edward Ward, The Miracles Perform'd by Money. London, 1692, p. 6. 

152 Inasmuch as The History of the Famous and Passionate Love is not accessible to 
me, I have been forced to rely upon the account of Grosse, pp. 102-110. Crowne's author- 
ship of the poem had already been noted in the British Museum Catalogue. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 45 

Crowne's poem is a parody of the love episode between Dido 
and Aeneas.^^^ Both the characters and the action are burlesqued. 
Minnum and the Parisian lady correspond to Aeneas and Dido, 
while Anna is coarsely parodied in Fan, maid of the Marquise. 
Jupiter is replaced by the Dean of Notre-Dame, who controls the 
destiny of Minnum as the god does that of Aeneas. Lavinia, the 
niece of the Dean, as the destined bride of Minnum, reproduces 
the name and role of Vergil's Lavinia, whom Aeneas must marry. ^^* 
Crowne does not carry through consistently the burlesque of his 
original, and often it becomes more of a translation than a parody. 
This is especially true of his descriptions of Fame and Night and 
the simile of the oak. The most noteworthy mock-heroic feature, 
perhaps, is the Parisian lady's curse of Minnum in imitation of the 
doom which Dido calls down upon Aeneas. The bonfire of violins, 
flutes, harps, and guitars which the Marquise kindles is a grotesque 
take-off upon Dido's funeral pyre and has no natural place in 
Crowne's poem. Among the characters the Marquise alone takes 
on any strikingly independent traits. She becomes a typical Parisian 
coquette. 

As a poem The History of the Famous and Passionate Love has 
little value and was the butt of contemporary satire. In a poem 
called The beginning of the First Satyr of Persius imitated. The 

Prologue, to Dr. M dly, probably written by Charles Gildon, 

occur the following lines: 

*T, who have never pass'd as yet 
The test of the mis- judging Pit . . . 
Nor from the tender Boxes e'r 
Yet have drawn one pitying tear : 
Nor with Sir Courtly, Roundelays 
Have made to garnish out new Plays, 
Nor Virgil's great majestick Lines 
Melted into enervate Rhimes. . . ."^'"^ 

While Crowne was thus engaged in poetic excursions outside 
of his ordinary field of literary endeavor, he contributed a song or 
two to The Gentlemxin's Journal. They were set to music by Henry 
Purcell, the famous composer of the time. 

158 Vergil, Aeneid, Lib. IV. 

154 Grosse, p. 107, considers Lavinia an original creation with Crowne, who parodies 
the idea that the future of Aeneas lies in Latium; but she was clearly taken from Vergil's 
Lavinia. See the Aeneid, Lib. VII. 

156 Miscellany Poems upon Several Occasions collected by Charles Gildon. London, 
1692, pp. 99-101. In addition to the evidence which they give of contemporary opinion, 
• Gildon's lines add materially to the proof of Crowne's authorship of the burlesque. 



46 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Several months after the publication of the Daeneids, Crowne's 
next play was brought out. The tragedy Regulus was played early 
in June, 1692, but did not prove a success. It was drawn very 
largely from a recently produced drama by Nicholas Pradon, a 
minor French writer of tragedy.^^^ In the year 1693 Crowne was 
apparently engaged on his new comedy, since an anticipatory an- 
nouncement of it appeared in The Gentleman's Journal for No- 
vember.^^^ Part of the summer of this year he spent in the 
Netherlands, as there is notice of a pass granted to him "to go to 
Holland" on June 29, 1693.^^® What the occasion of the excursion 
was, we cannot say. At length the anticipated comedy was finished, 
and The Married Beau was acted in May, 1694. It achieved a 
greater success than had been Crowne's lot since the appearance of 
Sir Courtly Nice nearly a decade earlier. With the production of 
The Married Beau the period of Crowne's prosperity and promin- 
ence as a dramatist draws to a close. Theatrical conditions were 
changing and the dramatists with whom he had been associated 
were no longer producing plays. Some of them, as Otway, Shad- 
well, and Lee, were dead, while others, like Dryden and Wycherley, 
had retired from play-writing. Younger men of brilliant talents, 
like Congreve, Farquhar, and Vanbrugh, were coming forward, 
and with these Crowne could not compete. Of Crowne's life dur- 
ing the nine years which we have just been considering, we know 
but little. He does not complain of financial distress during this 
period, and while some of his plays were not successful, he must 
have received fairly large returns from others. There is no record 
of his third day receipts from Sir Courtly Nice, but Downes record.s 
of Shadwell's Squire of Alsatia (1688), that "the Poet received for 
his third Day in the House in Drury-Lane at Single Prizes 130 1. 
which was the greatest Receipt they ever had at that House at 
Single Prizes. "^^® We may infer that Crowne's receipts were also 
large. The success of Darius was not great, partly because of the 
illness of Mrs. Barry; yet Lord Granville records that the author 
"had a most extraordinary third day by reason of the King's pres- 
ence at it,"^^° and Crowne himself admits that he was handsomely 
paid.^*^ A half dozen years later Southerne received for The Fatal 

156 See below, Chapter II, p. 161ff. 

157 Ibid., pp. 164-165. 

168 State Papers, Domestic, 1693, p. 202. 

169 Roscius Anglicanus, p. 41. 

160 Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts. Fifth Report, pp. 197-198. 

161 Works. III. 371. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 47 

Marriage (1694), 140 /. as his third day returns. Fifty noblemen 
gave him a guinea apiece and the printer, 36 /. for his copy.^^^ 
In view of this figure it is reasonable to suppose that Crowne's 
receipts for Darius approximated these sums. Similarly the finan- 
cial returns from The Married Beau must have been good. During 
this period, moreover, Crowne was not altogether dependent upon 
his efforts as a playwright. In the dedication of Caligula to the 
Earl of Rumney he writes: '"Your Lordship addrest to the late 
Queen of ever-blessed memory, in my behalf, and, by your inter- 
cession I had a large share of her princely bounty; and, no doubt. 
I should have had more, if England had longer enjoy'd her."^^^ 
From this statement it appears that Queen Mary did not forget 
the masque which the now ageing playwright had written for her 
when she was a princess in her 'teens at the court of her royal 
uncle.i^* 



VI. THE LAST YEARS. FINAL EFFORTS TO RECOVER 

HIS ESTATE. 

In the years immediately following the production of The 
Married Beau (1694) Crowne's physical condition was such as 
to preclude any possibility of literary composition. In the epistle 
to the reader prefaced to Caligula (1698) the author wrote: "I 
have for some few years been disorder'd with a distemper, which 
seated itself in my head, threatened me with an epilepsy, and fre- 
quently took from me not only all sense, but almost all signs of life, 
and in my intervals I wrote this play."^^^ This mental disorder 
seems to have afflicted him principally in 1695 and 1696, for we 
have no record of him during this time. In the spring of 1697, 
however, his health may have improved, for in April of that year 
he showed a fresh interest in his lost estate in America. On April 
17th he presented a petition to the Council of Trade and Plantations 
in which he reviews his father's claims and adds, "I beg that a 
clause may be inserted in Lord Belloment's instructions to give all 
just and convenient countenance to me for the recovery of my 
estate, in order that the planters may settle there, which they will 
be afraid to do without leave from me owing to the age and validity 

162 Malone-Boswell, Variorum Shakespeare, III, 162-164, Note 8. 

163 Works, IV, 350. 

164 See below, Chapter II, p. 79. 

165 Works, IV, 352. 



48 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

of my title."^^^ This seems to have been the first formal effort of 
Crowne to recover his property since his futile attempt to get 
Mounthope or Boston Neck in 1679 and 1680. Yet his lost posses- 
sions seem to have been constantly in the poet's mind. In his dedi- 
cation to The English Frier (1690) he refers to the loss of them 
pointedly as the circumstance which made him a dependent at 
court.^*^ 

The petition of April, 1697, was followed in January, 1698, 
by a long memorial which recites the English claim to Penobscot and 
the alleged mistreatment of the playwright's father by Temple. 
Crowne's contention was that Sir Thomas Temple went beyond his 
instructions in surrendering Penobscot to the French as a result 
of the treaty of Breda, and upon this he bases his claim. Thus he 
states in the latter part of the memorial: 

"When King Charles was informed of what Sr. Thomas 
Temple had done he was extremely displeas'd with it ; and wou'd 
not consent to it. Not long after a war broke out between 
ffrance and Holland. And the Dutch tooke the fort at Penob- 
scot from ye ffrench; and levell'd it wth ye ground, and then 
entirely quitted it. 

"Not long after, King Charles commission'd the Governour 
of New Yorke to take Penobscot, and the lands belonging to 
it under his jurisdiction. And the Governor of New York 
did accordingly and put a garrison in ye said trading house 
at Negue alias Crownes point. William Croune being deceased, 
his eldest son John Croune having information that his Royall 
Highness ye Duke of Yorke had begg'd Penobscot of ye King, 
the said John Croune petitioned his Highness to restore him ye 
inheritance, which his father had purchased, and his Highness 
referred him to ye commissioners of his revenue. And the 
cause lay before them undetermin'd during ye latter end of 
King Charles's reign, and all ye reigne of ye late King 
James."^«« 

On March 16, 1698, Crowne presented a second petition to the 
same Council in which he briefly reviews the claims made in the 
memorial, and adds: "I beg that, in view of the settlement of 
boundaries in America by Commissioners of England and France, 
my claim to these lands may be heard."^^® 

About the time of the second petition Crowne's last tragedy, 

\&Q State Papers, Colonial, 1696-97, p. 452. 

167 Works, IV, 19. 

168 Gay Transcripts. State Papers, IX, 1-9. It is to be found also in J. P. Baxter's 
History, op. cit., X, 25-30. 

169 State Papers, Colonial, 1697-98. p. 137. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 49 

Caligula, was acted. It was written, he tells us, in his lucid inter- 
vals while he was suffering from his mental disorder. It is not 
remarkable that a play written under such conditions should be 
lacking in any particular merit. Like many of Crowne's tragedies 
it seems to have been of doubtful success upon the stage. 

Apparently no progress was made by the Council of Trade 
and Plantations on Crowne's second petition during the remainder 
of 1698. According to the Journal of that Board, however, he 
attended a meeting at their request on January 18, 1699, and gave 
an oral account of his title to Penobscot.^^^ This he promised to 
reduce to writing, and on the following day he presented another 
memorial, which was read at the meeting of February 10th. Search 
of the records showed that the land had been transferred to the 
Colony of Massachusetts-Bay in 1691, but on May 30, 1699, the 
matter was still under investigation.^^^ 

Meanwhile the poet was struggling to earn a livelihood from 
the theatre. Having, it seems, regained something of his strength 
and vigor, he made a final effort in the field of comedy, in which 
formerly he had almost invariably succeeded. Justice Busy, or the 
Gentleman Quack was produced probably in 1700 at the new little 
playhouse built by Betterton, Mrs. Bracegirdle, and Mrs. Barry in 
Lincoln's-Inn-Fields. Like Caligula, however, it was not a success, 
and it was never printed. 

At last, impatient at the inactivity of the Council of Trade and 
Plantations, Crowne presented a petition directly to William III 
on June 17, 1700. In this appeal, after reviewing the case, he asked 
that the commissioners should be ordered to hear his title and that 
meantime he might receive something for costs and for his present 
support.^^2 On July 26th the petition was reviewed by the king and 
the petitioner was summoned to attend the Board of Trade and 
Plantations. Four days later he appeared and was directed to drav/ 
up a plain state of his title.^^^ His paper was received on August 
9th.^^* In November, 1700, he placed further proof of his claims 
in the hands of the Council,^^^ but it was not until January 21, 1701, 
that they had agreed upon their report. This was sent to the Privy 

no Ibid., 1699, p. 20. 

171 Ibid., pp. 22, 61, 65, 258-259. 

172 State Papers, Colonial, 1700, pp. 344-345. 

173 Ibid., pp. 430, 445. 

174 Ibid., p. 474. 

175 Ibid., pp. 663-664. 



50 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Council on the following day, and on January 23rd an order of 
the king in council directed that Crowne's petition be given to Mr. 
Secretary Vernon.^^^ According to the account in the Acts of the 
Privy Council, dated January 29, 1702, however, "nothing further 
was done before his Majesty's departure for Holland, but, on peti- 
tioning for relief, Crowne received 50 /. from the Treasury which 
is now spent." The account continues : "The claims of the French 
having prevailed at the Treaty of Ryswick, the land can be of no 
use to the petitioner till they are compelled to recognize it as a part 
of his Majesty's dominions."^^^ 

The report of the Privy Council just quoted refers presumably 
to a petition with Crowne made on July 24, 1701, to the Lords Jus- 
tices of England. In this document he states that he is almost in 
want of bread and asks for something to meet his present needs 
and for a recommendation of future charity and bounty, "neither 
of which can be displeasing to His Majesty, a just and gracious 
Prince, who, for all regall virtues, is greatly fam'd and belov*d 
by all." It is minuted on the document, "8,Augt 1701. Fifty 
Pounds. Paid out of Sec. Ser. 9th Aug. 1701 ."^^^ 

On March 8, 1702, William III died and Anne became queen 
of England. It is likely that Crowne welcomed the change in spite 
of his regard for the late king. Anne remembered that the play- 
wright had written a masque for her and her sister, and when soon 
after her accession he petitioned anew, it is recorded under date 
of June 22, 1702, that she was willing to favor him. His petition 
acknowledges the grant of 50 /. in the previous summer. His 
wants are again very great, however, and he prays for restoration 
of his lands and relief of his present necessities.^"^® From that time 
he seems to have depended upon the bounty of Queen Anne as 
his only source of support during his declining days. About De- 
cember 23, 1703, he petitioned the Lord High Treasurer stating that 
his wants were more than he was able to bear, and his debts more 
than he could pay. He therefore prays for relief. On the docu- 
ment it is minuted : "23 Dec. 1703. To have 50 U paid."^«« There 
are two notices of 50 /. payments to Crowne in the Money Book, and 
the editor of the Treasury Papers refers to one made on December 

176 Ibid., 1701, pp. 41, 45, 47. 

m Acts of the Privy Council, Colonial. The Unbound Papers, p. 10. 

178 Treasury Papers. 1697-1701-2, p. 513. 

179 State Papers, Domestic, 1702-3, p. 130. 

180 Treasury Papers, 1702-7, p. 218. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 51 

24, 1705. There is recorded a final petition to the Lord High 
Treasurer made about November 30, 1706, in which the poet states 
that he is sunk into deep necessities by the loss of his land in 
America, and prays for a further extension of his Lordship's good- 
ness. He is not disappointed, for we find a marginal entry : "To be 
paid 50 li."^^^ Thereafter the treasury papers are silent concerning 
John Crowne. Presumably the charity of Queen Anne, like that of 
others, had its limits. 

The date of Crowne's death, like that of his birth, has been 
shrouded in uncertainty. A. T. Bartholomew, writing of Crowne 
in The Cambridge History of English Literature, says that he "seems 
to have been alive in 1701."^^^ Most of the older biographers, how- 
ever, following a manuscript note by Oldys in a copy of Lang- 
baine's Account of the English Dramatic Poets to the effect that 
Crowne was alive in 1703, state that he died shortly afterwards.^®' 
As a matter of fact the poverty-stricken and superannuated play- 
wright lived for a half dozen years after the last recorded entry 
of Queen Anne's charity. He died late in April 1712, and was 
buried in the church of St. Giles-in-the-Fields on the twenty-seventh 
of the month. Although is was a common practice at St. Giles 
to record the parentage of the deceased, in the case of John Crowne 
only his name and burial date are given — mute testimony of the 
obscurity into which the once popular Restoration playwright had 
fallen.^«* 

Very little contemporary comment upon Crowne's last years 
has come down to us. To this period, however, belong the recol- 
lections of an old man writing in The Gentleman's Magazine in 
1745 : "Many a cup of metheglin have I drank with little starch' d 
Johnny Crown ; we called him so from the stiff unalterable primness 
of his long cravat."^^^ Like many another man the playwright 
may have been able to forget occasionally the wretchedness of his 
circumstances in the company of jovial companions around the 

l8ij&»d., p. 474. 

182 VIII, 189. 

183 Grosse, p. 18, is of this opinion also. 

184 The "Burrial" Book of the Church of St. Giles-in-the-Fields. I am indebted to my 
friend. Professor Alwin Thaler of the University of California, for much assistance in 
discovering the evidence for Crowne's death date. Oldys in his manuscript annotations in 
a copy of Langbaine stated that Crowne was buried in St. Giles-in-the-Fields. Sir William 
Musgrave in his Obituary Prior to 1800, II, 116 (Publications of the Harleian Society, 
XLV, 1900), recorded Crowne's death date as 1712, but failed to give the source of his 
information. It may be interesting to note in passing that St. Giles is the burial place 
of such well-known literary figures of the seventeenth century as James Shirley, Andrew 
Marvel, and Sir Roger L'Estrange. 

185 The Gentleman's Magazine, XV (1745), p. 99. 



52 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

tavern fire. Throughout their long careers the relations between 
Dryden and Crowne seem to have been cordial. They were both 
parties to the quarrel with Settle in 1674, as we have had occasion 
to notice, and in the acrimonious years of the Popish Plot period 
they were both staunch Tories. Even the Catholic conversion of 
the greater poet drew no personal satire from his lesser literary rival. 
Spence, however, had preserved an anecdote told to him by Jacob 
Tonson, the noted publisher, which indicates that the author of 
Absalom and Achitophel was sometimes jealous of Crowne's theatri- 
cal successes. As Spence tells it the story runs thus: 

"Even Dryden was very suspicious of Rivals. He would com- 
pliment Crown when a play of his failed, but he was cold to him 
if he met with success. He used sometimes to own that Crown 
had some genius ; but then he added, 'that his father and Crown's 
mother were well acquainted'. "^^® 

It is much to be regretted that Dennis did not fulfil his promise 
to continue his account from the death of Charles H to the death 
of Crowne.^^^ As it is we are limited to meagre official notices. 

VII. THE RELIGION AND POLITICS OF CROWNE 

The religious and political convictions of a man had much 
to do with his prominence in public life and in literary circles in 
the last sixty years of the seventeenth century. John Crowne's 
father early cast his lot with Parliament in the Civil War period, 
and during the rule of Oliver Cromwell as Lord High Protector 
he rose to a position of considerable prominence in Shropshire, 
and even in London where he sat as a member of Parliament in 
1654. Thus from his connection with the Commonwealth govern- 
ment we may infer that he was a dissenter in religion and a liberal 
in politics. In America he became a freeman of Boston in 1660, 
and a number of years later joined with the townsfolk of Mendon 
in the democratic government of the new community. Here, as 
we have seen, he served as town register for a number of years and 
was influential among the townspeople. 

Unlike Col. Crowne, at least in his later years, his playwright 
son was an Anglican in religion.^®^ It is likely that the rigid dis- 
cipline of his puritanical training in New England caused him upon 

186 Joseph Spence, Anecdotes, Observations, and Characters, p. 45. 

187 Dennis, I, 54. 

188 In the dedication to The Ambitious Statesman (1679) Crowne says: "I am very 
safe, since I agree with the Noble Kingdom in faith and worship." {Works, III, 142). 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 53 

his return to London to associate himself with the freer, more fash- 
ionable practices of the Established Church. Yet with the agitation 
of the Popish Plot years and later he was more violent in his opposi- 
tion to Catholicism and more severe in his satire upon Popish institu- 
tions and practices than many dissenters. I have suggested else- 
where that this animosity against the Catholic religion may well have 
been an abiding influence of Crowne's collegiate training in the puri- 
tanical Harvard.^^^ The playwright's outspoken opposition first 
asserted itself in the stormy times which followed the revelations and 
accusations of Titus Oates in 1678. In The Ambitious Statesman 
(1679) the Constable says to his son: 

"Go be a monk, in hope of being sainted. 
Give friars all thy gold in the rich hopes 
When thou art dead, they'll tip thy skull with silver; 
Stink all thy life, to be adored when dead. 
And have thy rotten bones to cure lame legs."^^° 

The Miseries of Civil-War (1680) was political rather than relig- 
ious in its satire. Only a few strongly anti-catholic references 
occur. When King Edward is accused by Lady Elianor Butler of 
breaking his contract with her, he says he will get a dispensation 
from the Pope. Thereupon Elianor exclaims : 

"What then his Holiness will be your pardon ? 
A very excellent office for a Pope 
To be the Universal Bawd of Christendom ! 
A very excellent Shepherd, that will give, 
His sheep a dispensation to be rotten !"^^^ 

The escape of Edward from the custody of the Archbishop of 
York gives Crowne an opportunity to satirize the priesthood through 
the remarks of Warwick.^®^ In the epilogue, referring to "that 
fowl Monster Civil- War", the author pays his respects to the dis- 
senters as well: 

"How ugly then she is when ridden blind 
With Pope before and Presbyter behind."^^^ 

In the same play he satirizes dissenting ministers and their flocks. {Works, III, 184). 
Two years earlier in the epilogue to The Destruction of Jerusalem, Part I, he refers to the 
"Fanaticks, who'll be angry with us all, 
For ripping up their base original. 
Shewing their sires, the Pharisees, from whom 
They and their cheats by long succession come." 

(.Works, II, 310). 
Again in the epilogue to The Miseries of Civil-War he refers to the time of his youth: 
"When graceless Rogues did Fight about free-grace." 

189 See above, p. 28. 

190 Works, III, 203-204. 

191 The Miseries of Civil-War, p. 55. 
192 /&iU, p. 61. 

193 Ihid., Epilogue. 



54 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

In his later adaptation, Henry the Sixth, the First Part (1681), 
religious satire is the raison d'etre of the piece. As the author says 
in his prologue, he has added to the Shakespearean version "a little 
Vinegar against the Pope." In his dedication Crowne explains his 
purpose more fully. Referring to Catholics, he says : "There is not a 
Tool us'd in the murder of Duke Humphrey in this Play, but what 
is taken out of their own Church Armory, nor a word put into the 
mouth of the Cardinal and his foolish Instruments, but what first 
dropt from the Heads that adorn their own Church Battlements." 
Further he comments upon the evil effects of holy-days and upon 
the prayers of his Third Murderer which he drew from contempor- 
ary French books of devotion: ''To expose these Follies to the 
People," he concludes, "is the business of this Play."^^* In the 
play itself the chief vehicle of Crowne's satire is the Cardinal, 
whose cynicism is used to expose the evils of the Roman religion. 
Two whole scenes are given over almost entirely to satire. The 
miracle of Simpcox's receiving his sight, from the older play, was 
easily converted by Crowne to his purposes. ^^^ To this he added a 
scene between the Cardinal and the three murderers in which the 
impoverishing effects of frequent holy-days are revealed, and the 
utter non-sense of certain prayers is exposed.^®^ 

Crowne's next play, Thyestes (1681), made on the framework 
of Seneca's play, would seem to offer small opportunity for venting 
religious animosity, but "where there's a will, there's a way." 
When Philisthenes is bound by Greek priests in order that he may 
become the victim of Atreus's revenge, Crowne lets the youth 
address them thus : 

"Kings wrong themselves 
And all the world, they do not hang you all; 
For kings are never safe, nor subjects good. 
Where priests prevail ; you keep the power of Kings, 
And only let 'em have what share you please. 
You take the foolish people's consciences. 
And give 'em back what honesty you please; 
You keep the keys of women's chambers too, 
And let men have what share in 'em you please: 
When you deliver up a marriage lock. 
You still reserve a key for your own use: 
But men or women may play any game 
And cheat their fill, if they will pay your box."^®^ 

194 Henry the Sixth, the First Part, Dedication. 

196 Ibid., pp. 22-26. 
196/fctd., pp. 50-54. 

197 Works. II. 66. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 55 

Such a pronouncement is an anachronism in the play, and reminds 
one of the rabid anti-Jesuit pamphlets of the day. 

With the discrediting of the testimony of Titus Oates and the 
fall of Shaftesbury, comparative calm returned to ' England, and 
Crowne's animosity slumbered for a time. The attempts of James 
II to foster his religion and to get tolerance for it must have galled 
Crowne, but he was compelled to be silent. With the coming of 
William of Orange in 1688, however, his suppressed opposition was 
again given free rein, and in The English Frier (1689) he assailed 
the Jesuit order in his severest fashion. Although Father Finical 
is borrowed from the Tartuffe of Moliere, it was Crowne who 
made him a friar. He retains the hypocrisy, avarice and sensuality 
of Tartuffe, but his clerical exterior makes his vices all the more 
striking. His identification with Edward Petre, King James IFs 
Jesuit privy councillor gives to the satire even greater force. As 
Crowne says in his prologue, 

"he does make bold a farce to shew 
Priests made and acted here some months ago."^^® 
Moreover, the prefatory matter bristles with condemnation of Ca- 
tholicism, and with indignation against the Englishmen who had 
forsaken the Protestant faith during the late reign. Whatever may 
be said for Crowne's fervor against the elder religion, he was sin- 
cere in his utterances and never changed his belief. 

The final satirical utterance of the playwright is associated 
with the year 1692. At that time he made his only extensive efforts 
in non-dramatic verse in two comic poems, both of which contain 
religious satire. The Daeneids, a. partial translation of Boileau's 
Lutrin, as we have had occasion to note, attacks the indolence of 
the priesthood and the petty strife of the clerics. The later sup- 
plementary poem, The History of the Famous and Passionate Love, 
is likewise directed against the Catholic clergy.^^^ Crowne had such 
an "aversion" for priests that even the pagan Hiarbas in Regulus 
(1692) is painted as unscrupulous and a lover of luxury .^°^ With 
the firm establishment of William and Mary upon the English 
throne, the danger of Catholic domination disappeared and Crowne 
allowed his opposition to subside. 

In his political views as well as in his religious beliefs the 
playwright son of Col. Crowne early showed a divergence from 

198 Works, IV, 27. 
109 Grosse, p. 102. 
200 Works, IV, 154. 



56 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

his father's point of view. It is probable that the younger Crowne 
would have become a Tory at the court of Charles II under any 
circumstances ; it was the natural course for those who desired to 
be influential and successful. In any case, the surrender of his 
father's estate by Temple to the French in 1670 forced such a 
course upon him. Two important circumstances of his life were 
the immediate result of that action. In the first place, "this loss," 
says Crowne, ''made me run into that Madness call'd Poetry, and 
inhabit that Bedlam call'd a Stage. "^^^ Secondly, "This fixt me in 
a dependence upon that court [of Charles II], for I could have my 
compensation no where else."^^^ Therefore very early in his dra- 
matic work he began what Genest calls "his career of loyalty."^"* 
In The History of Charles the Eighth of France he tickled the ears 
of Charles II with such lines as 

"It is a safer thing 

To blaspheme Heav'n, than to depose a King."^^* 
and 

"Subjects or Kingdoms are but trifling things 
When laid together in the scale with Kings."^^^ 
He dedicated the play to John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester, with 
whom he was then but slightly acquainted, but whose influence 
at court was great. The move was far-sighted, for in 1674 Rochester 
introduced the young playwright to the court and secured for him 
the commission for writing the masque Calisto}^^ This favor was 
due less to the dedication than to the nobleman's desire to humble 
Dryden and Settle ; but so far as Crowne was concerned, the results 
were the same. He had secured the attention of the king, and he 
made the best of his opportunity. The merry Charles must have 
smiled to himself at Mercury's remark : 

"How useful, and of what dehght 

Is sovereign power? 'tis that determines right. 

Nothing is truly good, but what is great."^"^ 
Yet the poet won the king's favor and bounty by his production, 

201 Henry the Sixth, the First Part. Dedication. 

202 Works. IV, 19. 

203 Genest, I, 124. 

204 Works. I, 139. 
206 Works. I, 163. 

206 Mrs. Rose A. Wright in her dissertation on The Political Play of the Restoration 
(Yale) p. 121, says, "Crowne became known as a dramatist through the favor of Lawrence 
Hyde, Earl of Rochester, by whom he was asked to write a masque for the court. Hyde 
was not created Earl of Rochester until 1681. John Wilmot, the profligate second earl, 
was the one who favored our author. 

207 Works. I, 264. 



( 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 57 

and in the following year, 1675, Charles enjoyed The Countrey 
Wit so much that the author was further honored.^^^ 

In the earlier years of Crowne's dramatic career the line of 
demarcation between the political parties was not clearly established, 
but with the convulsions which grew out of the Popish Plot a man 
became definitely either a Whig or a Tory. There were several 
reasons why Crowne should be a Tory during these years. He 
had won the king's favor and through it hoped to recover his 
father's estate. Anything therefore which endangered the king's 
power and prerogative, lessened his chances of a successful appeal. 
The claim of Oates and his followers that there was a plot to 
murder Charles and enthrone a Catholic king aroused Crowne to 
proclaim the divine right of kings vigorously in The Ambitious 
Statesman (1679). 

''Princes are sacred ! 

Whate'er religion rebels may pretend, 

Murderers of Kings are worshippers of devils, .... 

They who derive all power from the people, 

Do basely bastardise it with that buckler 

Which fell from heaven to protect innocence. 

They protect villainy; no sacrilege 

Greater than when a rebel with his sword 

Dares cut the hand of Heaven from King's commissions, 

To hide the devil's mark upon his own."^^® 

When the dangers of civil war threatened the kingdom as a result 
of the turmoil, and there seemed danger of a repetition of the 
strife of nearly forty years earlier, the playwright came forward 
with a Shakespearean adaptation to teach the people the inevitable 
result of such efforts. The Miseries of Civil-War (1680) under- 
took to show in what sad case the nation would be 

"With Pope before, and Presbyter behind." 
At the end of the play King Edward points to the fate of rebels 
and Usurpers, and adds: 

"A Monarch's Right is an unshaken Rock.^^io 
In his later Shakespearean perversion, Henry the Sixth, the 
First Part, Crowne forsook political questions temporarily, to in- 
dulge once more in religious satire ;^^^ but in 1682 he became in 

208 Works, III, 17. 

209 Works, III, 239-240. 

210 The Miseries of Civil-War, p. 71. 

211 Beljame in his Le Public et les Hommes de Lettres en Angleterre au Dix- 
huitieme Steele, p. 211-212, remarked: "Crowne, en 1679, est tory et preche avec ferveur 
I'obeissance passive; en 1681 il est whig et attaque les catholiques; en 1683 il redevient 



58 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

City Politiques the most outspoken of the Tory playwrights. The 
extreme political satire of the play we shall consider later ;^^^ suffice 
it to say that the Whig leaders are ridiculed in the most audacious 
fashion. So pointed was its satire, indeed, that the interference 
of Qiarles II was necessary to force Lord Arlington, a secret Whig, 
to allow its production.^^^ Crowne's comic masterpiece. Sir Courtly 
Nice, contains only two characters with political significance, and 
in them the poet raises himself above petty partisanship to satirize 
exceptional characters of both political factions. Testimony is a 
fanatic dissenter, but his creator could not resist the temptation 
of giving him a touch of hypocrisy. Hothead is a Tory to whom 
any canting dissenter is anathema. He is also satirized, but more 
gently than Testimony, and one feels that Crowne more or less 
sympathizes with him. 

The events of King James IFs reign led Crowne, like many 
other fervid Tories, to see the error of supporting the Stuart suc- 
cession at all hazards; and when the Catholic king was forced to 
flee in 1688, the playwright welcomed the change and revised his 
political views. His severe satire of priests in The English Frier 
was not of itself an indication of political conversion, but now he 
opposed himself to those who were 

*'so mad, they'd give up England's glory. 
Only to keep the wretched name of Tory."^^* 
In his dedication he attempts to vindicate his tardy relinquishment 
of Tory principles : 

" 'Tis true I oppos'd some that oppos'd the faults of Courts ; but 
'twas because I thought they did it in so faulty a manner, as 
made the better cause appear the worse, and confounded it with 
many a bad one."^^^ 

Eight years later, in the dedication to Caligula (1698), Crowne 
shows that his support of Whig interests had become whole-hearted. 
He writes: 

"This revolution .... has been so happy to England and 
the greatest part of Europe. Had not this change been, almost 

tory et attaque les whigs et les protestants; apres la Revolution il redevient whig." 
Bdjame was mistaken in thinking that Crowne became a Whig because he satirized 
Catholics in 1681. His opposition to Catholicism ran its course independent of his political 
views and was not determined by them. He could satirize his religious enemies side by 
side with the Whigs, but the next year he could ridicule these same Whig writers from 
a political point of view. Crowne's Toryism continued unchanged throughout the reign 
of Charles II. 

212 See below, Chapter II, p. 127ff. 

218 Dennis, I, 50. 

214 Works, IV, 27. 

215 Works, TV, 19. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 59 

all Europe had been overrun by France; England, for certain, 
had lost its right, liberties, and religion, and perhaps been no 
more a kingdom, but a province to France, a vassal to vassals, 
and for all its wealth had nothing but a wafer. What could 
have stop'd that inundation of power which was rolling on, and 
swelling as it roU'd, delug'd many parts of Europe, and threat- 
ened all? What could a formidable fleet and army, almost in- 
numerable, have ask'd of a few divided councillors, at White- 
hall, which they durst have deny'd ? And what a glorious figure 
does England now make, in comparison of what it did some 
years ago. It lay one reign becalmed in luxury, in another fet- 
tered. In this reign it has not only freed itself, but humbled 
France and protected Germany, Spain, and Holland, and appears 
one of the greatest powers in Christendom. "^^^ 

Doubtless there is an element of opportunism in these remarks, for 
in 1698 Crowne had renewed hopes of regaining his New England 
estate; but self-interest apart, he was a patriotic Englishman and 
saw clearly the errors of the court at which he had made his 
obeisance. 

VIII. THE PERSONALITY OF THE MAN. 

Concerning the personal appearance of John Crowne very 
little evidence has come down to us. No portrait of him is known. 
In 1678 Rochester described him as "little Starch'd Johnny C — " 
with "his Crevat-string new Iron'd" and "his lilly white Hand,"*^^ 
and in 1745 an old man, recalling the authors and players of the 
time of Charles II, still called him "little starch'd Johnny Crown" 
and explained, "We called him so from the stiff unalterable prim- 
ness of his long cravat. "^^® From these brief comments it appears 
that Crowne was a man of small stature, and one who retained 
a prim, puritanical mode of dress as the most striking feature of 
his personal appearance. 

These are only external traits, however; of the man's mental 
outlook and of his moral disposition a good idea may be formed 
from the prefatory matter in his published works. In the earlier 
period of his career Crowne showed the customary deference to 
the noblemen whose names graced his dedications, but in his ad- 
dresses to readers and audiences he is frequently arrogant and full 
of self-assurance. In the preface to Andromache this attitude is 
revealed in his characteristic reference to French playwrights: "I 

216 Works, IV, 348. 

217 The . . . Works of the Duke of Buckingham, 1707, I, 44-45. 

218 The Gentleman's Magagine, XV, (1745), p. 99. 



60 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

would no more be at the pains to bestow Wit (if I had any) on 
a French Play, than I would be at the cost to bestow Cloaths on 
every shabby Frenchman that comes over ; for neither of 'em would 
have qualities to deserve my Charity/'^^^ When, several years later, 
he was accused of using Racine's Berenice in the second part of 
The Destruction of Jerusalem, he replied : "That borrowing or 
stealing from Mr. Racine could not have supplied my occasions; 
but I am not so necessitous yet, nor have lived so prodigally on my 
small stock of poetry, to be put so soon to those miserable shifts. "^^° 
Yet as we shall see, he was under considerable obligations to the 
French dramatist. ^-^ In the same passage he has the objectionable 
self-complacency to remark : 'T love not too much carefulness in 
small things. To be exact in trifles is the business of a little 
Genius. "^^° Other examples might be cited of this arrogance, but 
perhaps these will suffice. As a result of this attitude Crowne roused 
considerable opposition. A part of the audiences which viewed 
The Countrey Wit showed their hostility ; yet the author takes credit 
to himself ''that no less than a confederacy was necessary to ruin 
my reputation."^^^ In the preface to The Ambitious Statesman 
his enemies are again brought forward. "Nothing is gotten by 
poetry," he says, "but a little reputation, and that some envious 
enemies of ours will rather fling to the dogs than let us have it. 
Witness the silly malice of some adversaries of mine, who, because 
my Epilogue had great success, would let anything rather than 
me be the author."^^^ During the years of political and religious 
turmoil from 1678 to 1690 Crowne incurred enmity on other scores, 
but there must have been something in his personality also to ac- 
count for the vindictive uproar which greeted the first performance 
of The English Frier. Some of the opposition was due to the 
aloofness which he cultivated for ordinary men. "I never did, or 
will, make court to multitudes," he says, "and therefore they never 
did, or will, make court to me."^^* 

In spite of his dislike for the crowd, Crowne was not in sym- 
pathy with the life of the courtiers. Dennis says, "He had . . . 
a Mortal Aversion to the Court. The Promise of a Sum of Money 
made him sometimes appear there to solicit the Payment of it: 

219 Preface to Andromache, 1675. 

220 Works, II, 238. 

221 See below, Chapter II, p. lOOff. 

222 Works, III, 17. 
228 Works, III, 147. 
224 Works, IV, 22-23. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 61 

But as soon as he had got it, he vanished and continued a long time 
absent from it."^^^ The poet himself says, "I never had a talent 
for begging, following, and waiting; the principal qualifications 
requisite in a man who will make his fortunes in the Court; but 
they were always more burdensome to me than any misery which 
I yet f elt."^^^ He was probably most at home sitting in some tavern 
over his ''cup of metheglin" with a few of the literati. Apparently 
he never married. Indeed, there was little of the glamor of romance 
in his life. Although he introduces conventional love episodes into 
his plays because of the demands of the time, he complains of the 
"whinings of love" which "like a pretty new tune, please for a 
while, but are soon laid aside, and never thought of more."^^'' He 
apologizes for the saintly women whom he creates, and adds his 
opinion of their sex. 

"They shall be saints no where but on the stage."^^^ 
On wife-hood and marriage he comments, perhaps jocosely, in one 
of the epilogues : 

"A wife has e'er since Eve been thought an evil. 

The first that danc'd at weddings was a devil. 

At the first wedding all mankind miscarried. 

Old Adam ne'er was wicked till he married."^^^ 
Crowne's literary ethics did not vary much from contemporary 
standards. A writer might admit his indebtedness to Moliere and 
Racine, or he might not. The public was vaguely conscious of the 
borrowings and thought nothing of them. Crowne's chief offence 
in this regard was a tendency to misstate the amount of his indebted- 
ness. In the case of his Shakespearean adaptations he says of 
The Miseries of Civil-War 

"The Divine Shakespear did not lay one stone,"^^° 
and of Henry the Sixth, the First Part, that Shakespeare had "no 
Title to the 40th part of it ;"^^^ yet both statements are brazen per- 
versions of the truth. Similarly he denies use of Racine's Berenice 
in The Destruction of Jerusalem, although he was in fact consider- 
ably influenced by it. 

The absence of details with regard to Crowne's private life 
prevents us from ascertaining much concerning his personal reli- 

225 Dennis, I, 50. 

226 Works, IV, 234. 

227 Works, II, 238, 

228 Works, II, 311. 

229 Works, III, 240. 

230 The Miseries of Civil-War, Prologue. 

231 Henry the Sixth, the First Part, Dedication. 



62 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

gion and private morality. The indecency of his comedies is 
no indication as to his habits of life. He lived in a vicious, cynical 
age; and as a dramatist dependent upon the success of his plays 
for a livelihood, he gave the public what they demanded, but he 
was no better or worse than his more celebrated contemporaries 
in this regard. His Anglican belief may perhaps have rested easily 
upon his shoulders, but he was more seriously inclined than most 
of the Restoration playwrights. Late in life he felt some qualms 
of conscience concerning the atheism of his heroic Phraartes, and 
he wrote, "I am sorry there should be any thing under my hand in 
defense of such a false, pernicious, and detestible an opinion." 
His concluding sentence, moreover, rings true : "I had rather have 
no wit, no being, than employ any part of it against him that made 
j^g "232 These words, which conclude his last printed address to 
the reader, may serve likewise to close our sketch of John Crowne. 

282 Works, IV, 354. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 63 

CHAPTER II. 

HISTORICAL DISCUSSION OF THE PLAYS. 

The dramatic career of John Crowne extended over a period of 
about thirty years, — ^the last three decades of the seventeenth cen- 
tury. During that time he wrote eighteen plays and had a hand 
in the translation of another. Of these the greater number — ^ten 
in all — are tragedies, six are comedies, one is a tragi-comedy, and 
one is called a masque. Only one, the last to be written, has not been 
preserved. It has been customary among the historians of English 
dramatic literature to treat Crowne primarily as a writer of tragedy, 
doubtless because the preponderance of his work lay in that field, 
but a survey of all his dramatic writings leads one to the conclusion 
expressed by Langbaine^ in Crowne's own lifetime that his comedies 
are a better expression of his ability as a playwright. Only one 
of his tragedies, the two-part heroic drama entitled The Destruction 
of Jerusalem, achieved a success comparable with that of several 
of his comedies, and that was due largely to contemporary taste 
and not to any particular excellence in the tragedy itself. The plays 
of Crowne do not represent any signal contribution to the dramatic 
tendencies of his time; but they are the product of an industrious 
playwright and a careful workman, who studied the demands of his 
audiences and, without any particular genius for drama, succeeded 
in writing several plays which had real success upon the stage. 

One finds in his works representatives of nearly all the types 
of plays in vogue during the Restoration period. He began with a 
tragi-comedy of the variety which Dryden wrote in the early years 
of his career; he followed that master likewise in the production 
of riming heroic plays. When Etheredge and Wycherley had 
pointed the way to a prose comedy of manners, he followed them 
too, and achieved at least one success. Sir Courtly Nice, which 
served to keep his name alive after most of his other works were 
forgotten. Finally when Dryden forsook heroic couplets and re- 
turned to the blank verse of the later Elizabethan playwrights, 
Crowne again followed in his footsteps. His most independent 
tendency, probably, was his occasional reversion to the practice of 
the Elizabethans.^ At a time when most tragedies followed the 

1 Langbaine, p. 90. 

2 This tendency Crowne followed in common with certain of his contemporaries such 
as Otway and Southerne. 



64 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

so-called classical rules, he introduced comic prose scenes in his 
Regulus; and more noteworthy still, he wrote a comedy of manners 
in the easy flowing blank verse of the type used by Fletcher and 
Shirley, when the practice of the time was to write in prose. 

JULIANA 

Crowne's first dramatic effort was a tragi-comedy entitled Juli- 
ana, or the Princess of Poland, in blank verse, heroic couplets, and 
prose. It was acted at the old Duke's Theatre in Lincoln's-Inn- 
Fields, probably in the summer of 1671 ; for it was licensed for 
printing in September of that year,^ and the author, in his dedi- 
cation, says that "It had the misfortune to be brought into the world 
in a time when the dogstar was near his reign . . ." and was 
"left, for the most part, to the mercy of a common audience."* 
This statement points to the long vacation, when the regular theatre- 
goers of the court were absent from London. The circumstances 
of its composition are also disclosed in the dedication: — "This un- 
worthy poem . . . was the off-spring of many confused, raw, 
indigested, and immature thoughts, pen'd in a crowd, and hurry 
of business and travel; interrupted and disorder'd by many im- 
portunate, not to say insolent affairs of a quite different nature, 
and lastly, the first-born of this kind that my thoughts ever laboured 
with to perfection."^ Probably the play was not a success on the 
stage, since the author laments the unfortunate season during which 
it was produced. 

The plot is confused, but may be summarized as follows: 
During the Interregnum in Poland the government is in the hands 
of the Cardinal, who, in order to remain in power, has formed a 
faction. The nobles, who have met at Warsaw to elect a king, are 
in favor of Juliana, daughter of the late king, and plighted to 
Ladislaus, Duke of Courland. The Cardinal, hearing of the Duke's 
secret arrival, offers a reward for his apprehension, and plans to 
imprison Juliana. She escapes his clutches by the assistance of 
Counts Sharnofsky and Colimsky, and curses the falseness of the 
Duke who, she thinks, has betrayed her honor. Meanwhile Cour- 
land in disguise engages rooms at the Landlord's inn, whither Paul- 
ina, daughter of the Czar of Muscovy, disguised in man's attire, has 

3 Title-page of the quarto, 1671; cf. also Edw. Arber, Term Catalogue, I, 87. 

4 Works, I, 18. 
6 Works. I. IS. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 65 

arrived in pursuit of the Duke to whom she mistakenly thinks her- 
self married. At the same inn is lodged Demetrius, a Russian prince, 
who thinks Courland has played him false by running away with 
Paulina. 

In the confusion which follows at the inn Paulina discovers 
Courland's identity, and representing herself as the Duke of Nov- 
gorod, challenges him in Demetrius' name to fight. Courland denies 
that he is married to Paulina, and when she is prevented from 
fighting with him, she plans revenge. From the Landlord's garden 
Courland sees Sharnofsky conducting Juliana to Colimsky's house. 
Following them, he sees Sharnofsky kiss her hand, and thinking 
her false, draws, and is wounded in the ensuing fight. While the 
Cardinal's men continue their plotting and are quarrelling with 
others, Juliana and her attendants arm themselves with pole-axes. 
The Cardinal desires to treat with the princess, and she engages 
him in debate. At length the Cardinal challenges Sharnofsky to 
a combat to determine which is the traitor. Juliana, unwilling to 
allow Sharnofsky to fight, proposes to give battle herself. 

The Cardinal's forces are successful in battle. Demetrius, dis- 
guised as Prince Radzeville and determined to be revenged on 
Courland, captures Juliana and Sharnofsky and reveals himself. 
He in turn is captured with his prisoners by the Cardinal's men. 
All three are likely to be killed, when the Duke, recovered from 
his wound, performs impossible feats in the field and rescues them. 
The perfidy of the Cardinal is revealed to the people, and they 
demand the crown for Juliana. The Cardinal, in despair, ends his 
own life with a poisoned handkerchief, and Juliana is crowned. 

Courland now determines to return home, but is aroused by 
the news that Juliana has resolved to resign the crown and enter a 
nunnery, and hastens to the palace. The nobles entreat Juliana to 
retain the crown, but she refuses and is offering it to Sharnofsky 
when Courland forces his way to the front. Raging with jealousy, 
the Duke reveals himself and strikes down Sharnofsky. He ac- 
cuses Juliana of being false and she retaliates by decreeing his 
death. Paulina, who in disguise has inflamed Courland's jealousy, 
is revealed as a woman, and tells the story of her marriage with the 
Duke. The confusion which follows is cleared up by Battista, 
the servant of Demetrius, who relates how Paulina was tricked 
into marrying Demetrius under the name of Courland. Demetrius 
who has pursued Courland with deadly hate, is in despair; but 



66 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Paulina agrees to accept him. Courland and Juliana are reconciled, 
and their latent love springs forth anew. Sharnofsky's wound 
is reported as not serious, and the happy lovers are proclaimed 
king and queen. The Landlord of the inn figures in nearly all of 
the incidents of the play, his character and ludicrous actions serving 
for comic relief. 

An examination of Polish history fails to reveal anything which 
corresponds even approximately to the main incidents in this play. 
No duke of Courland plays any such part in Polish affairs as is 
ascribed to Crowne's Ladislaus. No Polish princess since the days 
of Hedwig (1382-1386) was ever in a position similar to that of 
Juliana, and even in her case the similarity is not great. We 
must conclude, therefore, that the incidents of the play are fictitious 
and were evolved from the somewhat overcharged imagination of 
the young playwright. On the other hand, Crowne's choice of War- 
saw as a setting, and his use of Polish or pseudo-Polish names for 
the majority of his characters may in all probability be traced to 
the interest which Europe was manifesting in Polish affairs at the 
beginning of the 1670 period. A new playwright, wishing to get 
his work before the public, could not do better than to let it appear 
in the guise of romantic history concerning a nation upon which 
the public eye was then focussed. John Casimir had abdicated as 
king of Poland in 1668, and there was an interregnum during 1668- 
1669. This was brought to an end by a convocation of the Diet, 
and by the spectacular election of Michael Wisnowiechi, a Piast, 
over three foreign candidates, the prince of Conde, the prince of 
Neuberg, and Charles of Lorraine. Michael was a weak and 
improverished prince, and no one was more surprised at his election 
than himself.^ A conspiracy of great nobles was immediately formed 
under the Primate Prazmowski and the crown general Sobieski as 
original leaders, with the object of dethroning Michael.'^ Internal 
strife among the nobles turned Sobieski's attention to his private 
affairs, but finally the incursions of the Cossacks under Doroszenko 
caused him to return to his army. With a small force he drove 
them back to the Dniester in 1670.^ Meanwhile the plotting of the 
primate was discovered and came to naught. 

The interest which western Europe showed in the affairs of 

6 Bernard Conner, A History of Poland in Several Letters to Persons of Quality, 
London, 1698. I, 144. 

7 N. A. Salvany, Histoire du Roi Jean Sobieski ... I, 348. 

8 Salvany, I, 356. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 67 

Poland at this time and for the next year or so, when Sobieski made 
his gallant effort to drive back the invading Tartars and Turks, is 
seen in a little volume published at London in the spring of 1672 
concerning the Cossacks and Tartars and the wars of the former 
against Poland. Edward Browne, who translated the work from 
the French of Pierre Chevalier, says in his preface: "Although 
Ukraine be one of the most remote Regions of Europe, and the 
Cossackian name very modern; yet hath that Countrey been of 
late the Stage of Glorious Actions [the campaign of Sobieski] ; and 
the Inhabitants have acquitted themselves with as great valour in 
Martial Affairs, as any Nation whatsoever; .... Nor can 
this short Treatise be unseasonable, since most have their eyes upon 
this Countrey at present; and it is already feared, that the Turks 
and Tartars should make their Inroads this Summer into Poland 
through Ukraine, scarce a Gazette without mentioning something 
of it . . ."' 

Crowne may have been familiar with Polish history through 
the medium of Latin chronicles; but it is more likely that his 
knowledge was limited to contemporary affairs, accounts of which 
he might have gleaned from the Gazettes of the time. At least 
one reference to contemporary history occurs when Sharnofsky 
is accused of having letters 

''to Dorosensko General of the Tartars 

To assist you with fifty thousand men, 

Ten thousand cassacques should be sure to second him,"^'* 
It is possible, likewise, that the plotting of the primate Prazmowski 
may have suggested to Crowne the character of the Jesuitical 
Cardinal. On the other hand, it may be, as Dr. A. W. Ward sug- 
gests, that the dramatist had Cardinal Richelieu in mind.^^ A few 
of the Polish names ; viz., Ossolinsky, Lubomirsky, Radzeville, 
and Demetrius seem to have been drawn from the cognomens of 
contemporary nobles.^^ 

Juliana is written partly in blank verse, partly in heroic couplets, 
while the low comedy parts in which the Landlord appears are in 
prose. The play shows little promise. The exposition is obscure, 
and the plot is confused. There is Httle or no portrayal of character. 

9 A Discourse of the Original Countrey, Manners, Government, and Religion of the 
Cossacks - - - translated by Edward Browne, London, 1672, preface. 

10 Works, I, 37. 

11 A. W. Ward, A History of English Dramatic Literature, 1899, III, 400. 

12 A Discourse of the ... Cossacks, op. cit., pp. 87, 105, 136. 



68 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Moreover the introduction of the song celebrating Juliana's piety, 
and the dumb show of queens, ghosts, nuns, and angels is awkward. 
In fact the only redeeming features are the buffoonery of the Land- 
lord and the character of Paulina. 

CHARLES VIIL 

According to John Downes, the stage prompter, the first new 
play to be acted at the new Dorset Garden Theatre was Crowne's 
The History of Charles the Eighth of France. Downes says that 
"it was all new Cloath'd, yet lasted but 6 Days together, but 'twas 
Acted now and then afterwards." The new theatre was opened on 
November 9, 1671, with Dryden's Sir Martin Mar- All, which ran 
for three days and was followed by Etheredge's Love in a Tub, 
which had a two-day run.^^ Whether or not other old plays were 
revived before the production of Charles VIII, Downes does not say, 
but we are reasonably safe in thinking that Crowne's new play 
was staged before the end of 1671, and most likely in December. 
Although it ran but six days, it was probably regarded as a success 
by both playwright and company. It was first printed in quarto 
during Michaelmas term 1672.^* A second edition, also in quarto, 
appeared in 1680.^^ 

The plot of CItarles VIII runs as follows: Charles VIII of 
France has a claim to the kingdom of Naples through his father, 
which he decides to enforce by an expedition against the reigning 
king of the house of Arragon. On his approach to Naples, the 
people rebel against Alphonso, who abdicates in favor of his son 
Ferdinand, the people's choice. Ferdinand's outlook is not rosy, 
for Trivultio, his general, plans to align himself with the stronger 
force; and the Prince of Salerne, a fiery young rebel, will aid the 
young king only on condition of winning his sister Isabel as his 
wife. Isabel had recently become a widow when Lodovico poisoned 
his nephew, Galeazzo, Duke of Milan, and usurped the power. 
Before her marriage Charles VIII was her suitor, but through 
pride she had kept him at a distance. She now spurns Salerne 
and awaits the approach of Charles. He demands the surrender 
of the crown by Ferdinand, but the young king replies by sending 
Trivultio against him. The old general, however, attempts to side 

13 Roscius Anglicanus, London, 1886, pp. 31-2. 

14 Arber, Term Catalogues, I, 118. 

15 Ibid., I, 404. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 69 

with the French, but is scorned by them. Meanwhile Ferdinand, 
who is in love with Cornelia, widow queen of Cyprus, has detained 
her ships in the harbor and courts her. She gives him very little 
satisfaction and he goes out to repel the French. Trivultio and 
Salerne join in rescuing Ferdinand from a precarious position 
and gain the upper hand. In this situation Ferdinand meets Charles, 
and after some haughty words they prepare to fight. Charles ad- 
mires Ferdinand's bravery and embraces him ere they engage. At 
this juncture word comes that Trivultio and Salerne are successful 
and the two kings vie with each other as to which one shall chastise 
the rebels. 

Later the French king, while taking the air of his newly cap- 
tured city, discovers Ferdinand's sister Julia asleep in a garden, and 
is enraptured by her beauty. She already has made him her dream 
prince, and when Trivultio and Salerne attempt to carry out a 
bloody and desperate plot, Charles defends Julia and puts the rebels 
to rout. Isabella sees Charles with her sister, and is inflamed with 
jealous rage against him. In the meantime Queen Cornelia has 
apparently been lost on a sunken galley following a sea-fight between 
Ferdinand and Charles VIII's admiral. Ferdinand himself is 
made prisoner of war and bemoans Cornelia's fate. 

Spurred on by jealous hatred, Isabella leagues herself with 
Trivultio and Salerne, and plots to kill Charles. She even procures 
a magician, who shows her the spirits of Charles and Julia seated 
on thrones, and the ghost of Galeazzo, her dead husband, who fore- 
tells her early death. Julia, who in concealment has heard all, 
after some maidenly hesitation warns Charles of his danger. Isabella 
and her lieutenants make an attempt on Charles's life; but she is 
mortally wounded, and Salerne, being overcome by Ferdinand, 
tears open his own wounds, and dies. Cornelia unexpectedly re- 
turns alive, having been transferred to another ship in the fight. 
To the general amazement, Alphonso reappears and offers to resign 
the crown to Charles, who is overcome by this honorable proposal 
and gives it back to him, at the same time asking for the hand of 
Julia. Alphonso reabdicates in favor of Ferdinand, and Cornelia 
is prevailed upon to become the latter's queen. Isabella, bleeding 
from mortal wounds, is brought before the court and expires after 
a second summons by the ghost of Galeazzo. 

Charles VIII was written entirely in rime and, though the title 
of the first quarto. The History of Charles the Eighth of France, 



70 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

might suggest a chronicle play of the Elizabethan period, it belongs 
distinctly to the heroic type, then in the heyday of its popularity. 
That it was so regarded at the time of its appearance is indicated by 
the Duke of Buckingham's reference to Crowne in his "Timon, a 
Satyr, In Imitation of Monsieur Boileau" : 

*'Kickum for Crown declar'd, said in Romance 
He had outdone the very wits of France : 
Witness Pandion; and his Charles the Eight."^* 
The sources, however, in all likelihood were historical rather than 
fictitious. Among the references which Langbaine gives "for the 
Plot of this Play, as far as it concerns History," the Italian History 
of Guiccardini^^ seems the most probable source of Crowne's in- 
formation. Books One and Two give a very complete account of the 
expedition of Charles against Naples. All but one of the historical 
characters which Crowne utilizes are introduced by Guiccardini. 
In addition to Charles himself the following characters are historical : 
Alphonso and Ferdinand of Naples ; the Prince of Salerne ; Lewis, 
Duke of Orleans ; Mompensier ; Trivultio,^ the Neapolitan general ; 
Isabella, the widow of John Galeazzo, Duke of Milan ; and Cornelia,^* 
the widow queen of Cyprus. These personages are all mentioned 
by name in Guiccardini except Cornelia. Philip de Commines 
in his Memoirs^^ gives an account of the expedition from a French 
point of view. His narrative, however, allows scant space to the 
actual investment of Naples and fails to mention Trivultio. On 
the other hand, Commines' account may possibly have suggested 
to Crowne the idea of adding the history of the ill-fated Cyprian 

16 The Miscellaneous Works of His Grace George, Late Duke of Buckingham, London, 
1707, I, 60-61. Crowne dedicated his play to John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester. This fact 
led Langbaine {English Dramatic Poets, p. 92-3) when he made his remarks on the play, 
to write as follows: "This play notwithstanding the Patronage of his Lordship, could not 
escape his Railery; for in his Imitation of Boyleau's third Satyr he brings in Mr. Crown 
as follows:" He then quotes the passage given above as being taken from Rochester's 
poems. It may have appeared in the editions of 1680 and 1685, but it is not included 
in the 1696 edition of his works which is itself a re-issue of the edition of 1691, regarded 
as the one containing most of the authenticated pieces of Rochester. (I have not been 
able to see the editions of 1680, 1685, and 1691). Neither is it present in Jacob Tonson's 
edition of 1714. On the other hand, the poem appears in an edition of the works of the 
Duke of Buckingham in 1707, where it is specifically stated that it was written by that 
nobleman. The editors of the Biographia Dramatica, II, 92-3, repeat the substance of 
Langbaine's remarks, but add that the poem appears in Buckingham's works as by the 
Duke of Buckingham and the Earl of Rochester. They find also that in some collections 
of Rochester's poetry the poem is printed as wholly his under the title: "The Rehearsal, 
a Satire." The satire upon Crowne's play is not severe and is entirely merited, and 
Rochester was capable of treating thus a play dedicated to him. In spite of this fact, 
however, it seems to me more likely on the whole that "Timon" was the work of Bucking- 
ham. 

17 The History of Guiccardini, translated by Geffrey Fenton, London, 1618, Lib. 1-2, 
pp. 1-80. 

18 Maidment and Logan (^Works, I, 124) are mistaken in supposing Trivultio and 
Cornelia to be the invention of Crowne. For Trivultio, cf. Guiccardini, Lib. I, pp. 27, 52. 

10 The History of Comines. Englished by Thomas Danett. Anno 1596, Tudor 
Translations, London, 1897. II, Book VII, chaps. 2, 4, 5, 10-13. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 71 

queen to that of Ferdinand. In an attempt to show that the Vene- 
tians had no right to the realm of Cyprius, Commines prepared a 
pedigree of the Cyprian royal family in which "Katharine, daughter 
of Marke Comaire, Senator of Venice," and James her husband 
are listed.^" 

Th^re is no doubt that the Cornelia of the play is drawn from 
the life and history of Caterina Cornaro, a beautiful and gentle 
Venetian lady who became the queen of James II of Cyprus in 1468. 
Before her departure for Cyprus she was given a dowry of one 
hundred thousand ducats and adopted as "a daughter of the Vene- 
tian Republic". Her husband died in 1473, and her child in 1474. 
From that time until Venice forced her to abdicate in 1489, her 
life was full of care. Historically her only connection with Naples 
was a plot to marry her to Alphonso (the father of Ferdinand in 
Crowne's play).^^ That Crowne was acquainted with the details 
of Caterina's Hfe from some source is evident from the bits of 
history which he puts into the mouth of Cornelia. ^^ She says to 
Julia in speaking of her recall to Venice, 

"But I must yield to my imperious fate, 
For my kind fathers, the Venetian State, 
Do at their wills dispose my Crown and me."^^ 

In another place in addressing Ferdinand, she refers to her dead 
husband : 

"Yet as a widow Queen, that lately paid 
Her solemn sorrow to the royal shade 
Of her dead lord, I surely must reprove 
All new addresses of a second love."^* 
In reality, James II of Cyprus died in 1473 and Caterina abdicated 
perforce in 1489, while the expedition against Naples occurred in 
1494 and 1495. Still further details of Caterina's history are 
revealed by Cornelia when she asks Ferdinand : 

"But how can she support another's throne 
Who is dispos'd and banisht from her own? 

20 The History of Comities. II, 378. 

21 For a good account of Caterina, of. Horatio Brown, Studies in Venetian History, 
London, 1907, I, 255-92. 

22 An interesting romance devoted to the life of Caterina Comaro has recently been 
published by Mrs. Lawrence Tumbull, entitled The Royal Pawn of Venice. It is true in 
general to the historical accounts of its heroine, A great deal is made of the intrigues 
of Rizzo to get the Cyprian succession into the hands of Prince Alphonso of Naples. 
Incidentally a romance is developed around Alnesi Bernadini, Caterina's Venetian adviser 
and Dama Margherita, a Cyprian maid of honor. I am indebted to Professor Kittredge 
for the suggestion of this reference. 

23 Works, I, 151. 

24 Works, I, 174. 



72 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

A distrest Queen, who since the old King died, 
Have been too much opprest on every side. 
The Egyptian Sultans threating every hour 
T'invade my kingdom with their mighty power, 
And none to guard me from this threat 'ned fate 
But my good fathers, the Venetian State, 
Who wisely did adopt me in design 
My falling crown t'intice me to resign. 
Thither I go, forced by a fate so rude 
To spend my days in pious soHtude."^* 
Although Crowne makes Cornelia happy by uniting her to Ferdi- 
nand, as a matter of history Caterina was given the castle of Asolo,*^ 
where she ruled over her little estate in true queenly fashion. The 
dramatist was probably not choosing idly when he made Cornelia 
the name of his queen. Caterina Comaro's family claimed that the 
blood of the Roman Cornelii ran in their veins,^^ and Caterina 
was welcomed to Asolo by the poets as Cornelia.^^ 

Crowne's handling of history in connection with the Queen 
of Cyprus is typical of his treatment of it as regards the expedition 
of Charles VIII. He portrays Charles as a generous, chivalrous 
leader who is chiefly concerned with love and honor. Guiccardini, 
on the contrary, describes him as unsound of body, deformed, 
weak-minded, with an inclination to glory, but rash in his actions.*' 
Crowne provides him with a love affair with Isabella, wife of the 
ill-fated John Galeazzo, Duke of Milan ; and marries him eventually 
to her sister Julia, a fictitious personage. Historically Charles VIII 
married Anne of Brittany before he went on his Italian expedition," 
while his relations with Isabella were confined to a visit to Milan 
in 1494, when that Duchess pleaded in vain with him to have pity 
on her father and brother.^" The dramatist's treatment of Ferdinand 
is very similar. In the play he is a heroic figure who challenges 
Charles to single combat; and later, fighting valiantly against the 
rebels, subdues the fiery Prince of Salerne. In the end he is gener- 
ously allowed to rule in Naples and marries Cornelia. Historically, 
however, Ferdinand counselled the people of Naples to submit to the 

25 Asolo, it may be noted, was for a time the residence of Robert Browning. Brown- 
ing has of course introduced "Kate the Queen" into Pippa Passes. 

26 Horatio Brown, op. cit.. I, 262. 

27 Ibid., I, 286. 

28 Guiccardini, op. cit., Lib. I, p. 33. 

29 Ibid., Lib. I, p. 19. 

BO Ibid., p. 37; Comines, Book VII, ch. 6, II. 191. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 73 

French, and fled to Ischia.^^ Later, after Charles had left the 
city, he won it back and married Jane, his aunt.'^ 

The characters of the play which may be regarded as creations 
of the author are Gonsaivo, Cornelia's admiral; Irene, her con- 
fidante; Julia,^^ the sister to Ferdinand and Isabella; and Ascanio, 
the friend of Ferdinand. The name "Ascanio" was perhaps sug- 
gested to Crowne by a Cardinal Ascanius or Ascaigne, mentioned 
by both Guiccardini and Commines. 

As a piece of dramatic composition Charles VIII shows an 
advance over Juliana, Crowne's first play. The exposition is handled 
with greater skill and the action develops more evenly. The play has 
all the characteristic defects of heroic drama such as exaggerated 
ideas of honor on the part of its heroes, and the subordination of 
everything to love, but it has none of those redeeming touches of 
real poetry which Dry den was able to give to his heroic plays. 
Thus early Crowne clearly establishes the dead level of his heroic 
verse. 

ANDROMACHE 

The next dramatic publication which is associated with the 
name of John Crowne is the tragedy of Andromache, translated 
from the French of Jean Racine. The title-page of the only edition 
bears the date 1675, but does not name the author. There is an 
epistle to the reader, however, which is signed with Crowne's initials, 
"J. C," and which explains the occasion for the translation and 
our author's connection with it. Inasmuch as this play exists only 
in the original quarto and reveals the current English attitude 
towards French tragedy, it may be convenient to have it before 
us in its entirety. It is as follows : 

"This Play was Translated by a young Gentleman, who 
has a great esteem of all French Playes, and particularly of this ; 
and thinking it a pity the Town should lose so excellent a 
Divertisement for want of a Translation, bestow'd his pains 
upon it; and it happening to be in my hands in the long Vaca- 
tion, a time when the Play-houses are willing to catch at any 
Reed to save themselves from Sinking, to do the House a 
kindness, and serve the Gentleman, who it seem'd, was desirous 
to see it on the Stage, I willingly perused it, but found neither 

31 Guiccardini, pp. 53-4. 
82 Gtiiccardini, p. 87. 

33 According to Comines, II, 383, Alphonso of Arragon had only two children, Ferdi- 
nand and Isabella. 



74 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

the Play to answer the Gentlemans Commendation, nor his 
Genius in Verse very fortunate, and yet neither of 'em so 
contemptible as to be wholly slighted; but neither the Gentle- 
man nor my self, having leisure enough to make those Emenda- 
tions, which both the Play and the Verse needed; I begged 
leave of him to turn it into Prose; which I obtained and so 
it is in the condition you see. If the Play be barren of Fancy, 
you must blame the Original Author. I am as much inclined 
to be civil to Strangers as any Man; but then, they must be 
Strangers of Merit. I would no more be at the pains to bestow 
Wit (if I had any) on a French Play, then I would be at 
the Cost to bestow Cloaths on every shabby French-Man that 
comes over; for neither of 'em would have qualities to deserve 
my Charity. Yet that I prejudice not the Book- Seller, I will do 
him and the Play this right to say, that this of French Playes, 
is far from being the worst. It is much esteemed in France, and 
here too, by some English who are admirers of the French 
Wit, and think this suffered much in the Translation, I can- 
not tell in what, except in not bestowing Verse upon it, which 
I thought it did not deserve ; for otherwise there is all that is 
in the French Play verbatim, and something more, as may be 
seen in the last Act, where what is only dully recited in the 
French Play, is there represented ; which is no small advantage : 
but to let these Gentlemen, whoever they are, enjoy the felicity 
of their opinions, I will make bold to affirm, the Play deserved 
a better liking then it found ; and had it been Acted in the good 
well meaning times, when the Cid Heraclius, and other French 
Playes met such applause, this would have passed very well ; but 
since our Audiences have tasted so plentifully the firm English 
Wit, these thin Regalio's will not down. This I thought good 
to say, both for the play, and also in my own behalf, to 
clear my self of the scandal of this poor Translation, where- 
with I was slandered, in spite of all that I could say in 
private in spite of what the Prologue and Epilogue affirmed 
on the Stage in publick which I wrote in the Translators name, 
that if the Play met with any success, he might wholly take 
to himself a Reputation, of which I was not in the least 
ambitious." 

According to the Term Catalogue, ^^ Andromache was published 
in Hilary term, 1674-75; that is between November 24, 1674 and 
February 15, 1675. The epistle to the reader states, however, that 
the play was placed in Crowne's hands in "the long Vacation, a 
time when the Play-houses are willing to catch at any Reed." The 
indications are, therefore, that the play was acted during the long 
vacation preceding its publication. This date is confirmed by 
the Epilogue which, after comparing the theatre to a country gentle- 

S4 Arber, Term Catalogue, I, 197. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 75 

man who entertains lavishly at Christmas time but sparingly at 
other seasons, continues 

"At such fond charge this House has been of late, 
But Friends all gone, must now their charge abate, 
And though to treat a Friend they'l not deny 
Yet must to you who come but by the by 
Serve up cold Meats, for such Translations are . . ." 
These lines are a reference to the curtailment of expenses during 
the summer season, when most of the theatre-goers were absent 
from London. Hence we may fix upon the summer of 1674 as 
the date of the production of Andromache. 

The drama is a reasonably literal but bald and uneven trans- 
lation of the French play, with the exception of the final scene, 
which is a rearrangement of the last three scenes of Racine to suit 
the English fashion in tragedy. The alterations in the first four 
acts are of a very minor nature. In Act I the long speeches of 
Orestes are broken up into shorter ones. In Act II Orestes' solilo- 
quy is abridged by half.^^ In the third act two speeches by An- 
dromaque and Pyrrhus from scene six of Racine are omitted.** 
The changes in the last act, however, deserve greater consideration. 
The first two scenes of the French play are translated. In them 
Hermione wavers in her desire for the death of Pyrrhus at the 
hands of Orestes, but is very eager for it when she learns from 
Cleone that Pyrrhus and Andromaque are married, and that the 
former thinks only of his bride. From this point Racine makes his 
characters narrate the tragedy in the last three scenes as follows : — 
Orestes returns to Hermione and relates how the Greeks rushed 
upon Pyrrhus and killed him. Thereupon, instead of rewarding 
him with her love, Hermione upbraids him for executing a wish 
which she had breathed in a moment of distraction, and bids him 
begone. Orestes in a dazed condition wonders if the things which 
have happened are real. His friend Pylades pleads with him to 
depart ere the Epireans overcome them, and tells how Hermione 
went to the place where Pyrrhus lay dead and stabbed herself. At 
this news Orestes goes mad and rages. He is removed from danger 
by Pylades and the soldiers. The English version alters these 
scenes so as to make a dramatic spectacle of the tragedy, as follows : 
Orestes and the Greeks enter the temple and scatter themselves 
about as Pyrrhus and Andromache approach attended in solemn 

35 Andromache, London, 1675, p. 15. — Andromaque in the Oeuvres Completes de J. 
Racine par L. Aime-Martin, Paris, 1825, I, 502-3. 
S« Andromaque, III, 6, p. 525. 



76 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

procession. There is a marriage song and chorus, after which 
Pyrrhus crowns his bride. The enraged Greeks surround and kill 
him, and drag his body from the temple. As Orestes is departing, 
he meets Hermione with a naked poniard in her hand, and relating 
how the deed was done, he bids her fly with him. She turns against 
him, however, accuses him of being an assassin who should not 
have heeded her distracted pleas, and departs with Andromache. 
Orestes is dazed for a moment, but when Pylades comes urging him 
to fly, he insists on following Hermione. At this point the bodies 
of Pyrrhus and Hermione are brought in, and a Greek relates how 
she killed herself. Orestes goes mad, but is rescued by the Greeks 
from the pursuit of Phoenix, and the Guards. Cephise reports the 
safe departure of the Greek fleet to Andromache, who wonders at 
the manner in which the gods have avenged her. In spite of the 
considerable change which is here indicated, the additions are slight, 
since the lines of Racine are shifted to fit with the new situation.*^ 

The most noteworthy matter connected with the English 
Andromache is the curious state in which the text is preserved. 
From the introductory epistle, one is led to expect a prose play, but 
this is not entirely the case. Almost at the beginning of Act IV*® 
the straight prose dialogue gives way to a bastard mixture of prose 
and heroic couplets, sometimes in the same speech.^^ This in turn 
is discarded in favor of continuous couplets, with now and then a 
few lines of blank verse. A satisfactory explanation of this unusual 
mixture of prose and couplets in the same play is not easy to find, 
but it may be that the couplet scenes represent those parts of the 
work of the "young Gentleman" which were not "so contemptible 
as to be wholly slighted." One might suggest, also, that the 
summer company demanded the play for production before Crowne 
had completed his prose rendering. 

Some doubt has been thrown on Crowne's epistolary explana- 
tion of his share in the translation by Miss Dorothea Canfield [Mrs. 
Dorothy Canfield Fisher], who implies that he fabricated his dis- 
claimer of authorship in order to save his face after the work had 
been coldly received.*^ It is true that Crowne's prefatory word is 

37 In detail the speech of Pyrrhus ^Andromache, 41) translates the words quoted by 
Orestes (.Andromague, 567). Orestes' speech (Andromache, 43) continues this same 
speech (.Andromaque, 568), and so the third and fourth scenes are translated as they 
are in Racine. The last lines of 'a Greek's' speech (Andromache, 46) are from Pylades' 
speech (Andromague, 574). The remarks of Andromache and Cephise at the end (Andro- 
mache, 48) are English additions. 

88 Andromache, 27. 

39 Ibid., 27-30. 

40 Dorothea Canfield, Corneille and Racine in England, p. 88-92. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 77 

not always to be trusted implicitly, but in this instance there is no 
reason to doubt his statement until evidence to the contrary is 
forthcoming. One can agree with Miss Canfield, however, that 
"the translation is an astonishingly bad one. Racine's melodious 
and flowing lines are rendered in the baldest and barest of prose 
translations, quite without grace of any sort."*^ Such too, is the 
opinion of Genest*^ and Beljame,*^ and more recently still of 
Charlanne.** 

CALISTO 

Under date of December 15, 1674, John Evelyn has the follow- 
ing entry in his diary : "Saw a comedie at night at Court, acted by 
the ladies onely, amongst them Lady Mary and Ann, his Royal High- 
nesses two daughters, and my dear friend Mrs. Blagg. . ." On 
December 22nd he was at a "repetition of the Pastoral."*'^ Evelyn's 
references to a "comedie" and "Pastoral" are to Crowne's masque 
of Calisto: or The Chaste Nimph, performed at court between 
twenty and thirty times*® from December 8, 1674 until January 12, 
1675."*^ On September 22, 1674 Margaret Blagge wrote to her 
friend Evelyn that "the play goes on mightyly, which I hoped would 
never have proceeded farther."*^ This evidence is in accord with 
the statement of Crowne that, although he finished his part in the 
time allotted to him, scarcely a month, the first performance did 
not take place until several months after the date originally set, 
owing to the time required in perfecting the musical and dancing 
parts.*® The date of composition may be placed, therefore, with 
some degree of assurance, in the summer of 1674. Its present form, 
says the author, was "finished and learnt between the second and 
third representation," that is in December 1674.*'° It was published 
in Michaelmas term 1675 in quarto form. The Prologue had been 
printed separately several months earlier.**^ 

41 Ibid., p. 90. 

42Genest, I, 178. 

48 Alexander Bdjame, Le Public et les Hommes de Lettres en Angleterre au DiX' 

44 Charlanne, L Influence franqaise en Angleterre au XVIIe Steele, Paris, 1906 p. 
huitieme Siecle. Paris, 1881, p. 103. 
141. 

46 The Diary of John Evelyn, edited by H. B. Wheatley, London 1906, II, 305. 

46 Works, I, 238. 

47 Notes and Queries, 2nd Series, VI, 517. "An Acompt of such things as wer 
delivered to Mr. Cabbin for his Maties Great Ball from the 8th of December, 1674 till 
the 12th of Jany. next Enshewing." 

48 John Evelyn, The Life of Mrs. Godolphin, New York, 1847, p. 52. 

49 Works, 1, 236-7. 
BO Works, I, 238. 

BiArber, Term Catalogue, I, 211, 218. 



78 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

The reason for the choice of Crowne as the writer of the 
masque reveals an interesting chapter in the literary history of the 
Restoration. About 1670 the earl of Rochester was showing many 
attentions to Dry den, who in turn flattered him extravagantly in 
the dedication of his Marriage a la Mode (1673). In 1671 or 1672 
a quarrel developed between Rochester and John Sheffield, Earl of 
Mulgrave, over an insulting remark which the former was alleged 
to have made concerning the latter. Mulgrave challenged Rochester 
to a duel on horseback. He accepted, and accompanied by an un- 
known second, met Mulgrave. Col. Aston, Mulgrave's second, 
objected to the unknown second, and to Rochester's superb mount- 
ing, since his principal was riding a small hack. Rochester yielded 
and dismounted, but astonished his opponent by remarking that 
he was really too ill to fight. As a result no duel took place, but 
to satisfy the curiosity of the Londoners, Mulgrave felt obliged to 
state the reason, and Rochester lost his reputation for courage.**^ 

Meanwhile Mulgrave became Dryden's patron, probably 
towards the end of 1673 ; and friendly relations between Rochester 
and Dryden ceased. From that time until his death Rochester was 
a persistent enemy of the great poet. Until recently it has been 
held by most scholars^^ that Rochester, by way of retaliation upon 
Mulgrave, began to encourage Dryden's literary rivals by espous- 
ing the cause of Elkanah Settle, whose play. The Empress of 
Morocco, was performed at Whitehall. It is undoubtedly true that 
Rochester favored the production of Settle's play at court, but 
Mr. F. C. Brown has shown that The Empress of Morocco was 
produced not later than 1670.^* Inasmuch as Rochester's quarrel 
with Mulgrave and the latter's patronage of Dryden are of a later 
year, it is very unlikely that Wilmot had in mind the possible 
humiliation of Dryden when he advanced Settle.^^ 

Settle basked in the light of public favor for several years, but 
at length Rochester grew weary of him, and in the summer of 1674 
recommended Crowne to the king to write the masque of Calisto. 
As Malone well says, "By the recommendation of Crowne Roches- 
ter's malice was doubly gratified; for besides mortifying Settle, a 

62 [Thomas Longueville], Rochester and Other Literary Rakes of the Court of Charles 
II. London, 1903, pp. 208-16. 

58 Edmund Malone, The Critical and Miscellaneous Prose Works of John Dryden, 
London, 1800, I, Part I, 124; Sidney Lee on Rochester in the Diet, of Nat. Biog. XXI, 536; 
Scott and Saintsbury, The . . . Works of John Dryden, I, 153 ff. 

54 F. C. Brown, Elkanah Settle, Chicago, 1910, p. 52-3. 

66 For the literary quarrel which grew out of The Empress of Morocco see Chapter 
I, supra, p. 32 ff. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 79 

marked slight was shown to Dry den, whose office as Poet Laureate 
it peculiarly was to compose such entertainments for the court."®' 
That Crowne was aware of his being thrust into Dryden's place 
is evident when he apologizes to the reader for the poorness of the 
piece. He says, ''Had it been written by him, to whom, by the 
double right of place and merit, the honour of the employment 
belonged, the pleasure had been in all kinds complete. "^^ 

The editors of the Biographia Dramatica state that Calisto was 
written at the command of James H's Queen when she was duchess 
of York.^® On this point, however, they would have done well to 
follow their chief source more closely. Langbaine,^^ writing in 
1691, says the masque was written "at the Command of her present 
Majesty"; i. e. Queen Mary, when she was a princess. Moreover, 
Crowne dedicated the masque to Princess Mary and referred to 
his task as "the glory of serving your Highness. "^^ The two 
princesses, Mary and Anne, were very young in 1675, being respec- 
tively thirteen and eleven years old;^^ but they never forgot the 
pleasure which Crowne helped to provide for them, and were kind 
to him in his old age. 

The plot of Calisto may be summarized thus: Jupiter, in de- 
scending to earth to repair the damage done by Phaeton when he 
drove the chariot of the sun too near the earth, is enraptured by 
a nymph of chaste Diana's train, whom he has encountered in 
Arcadia. This nymph, the princess Calisto, and her sister Nyphe, 
are the favorite followers of Diana, who showers her praises upon 
them. Psecas, a proud and haughty nymph of the train, is jealous 

56 Malone, The . . . Prose Works of Dryden, I, Part I, 134. John Dennis 
{Original Letters, I, 49) first pointed out Rochester's relation to Calisto. He wrote in 
his letter on Crowne's life; "Yet it was neither to the Favour of the Court, nor of Wilmot 
Lord Rochester, one of the Shining Ornaments of it, That he was indebted for the Nomina- 
tion which the King made of him for the writing of the Mask of Calypso [sic], but to 
the Malice of that noble Lord, who design'd bv that Preference to mortify Mr. Dryden." 
CoUey Gibber in his Apology (edited by R. W. Lowe, London, 1889, II, 209-10) writes: 
"After the Restoration of Charles II. some faint Attempts were made to revive these 
Theatrical spectacles at court; but I have met with no account of above one Masque acted 
there by the Nobility, which was that of Calisto . . . For what Reason Crown was 
chosen to that Honour rather than Dryden, who was then Poet-Laureat and out of all 
comparison his Superior in Poetry may seem surprizing: But if we consider the Offense 
which the Duke of Buckingham took at the Character of Zimri in Dryden's Absolom &c. 
(which might probably be a Return to his Grace's Drawcanser in the Rehearsal) we may 
suppose the Prejudice and Recommendation of so illustrious a Pretender to Poetry might 
prevail at Court to give Crown this Preference." Lowe adds the following note: " 'Calisto' 
was published in 1675. Genest (I, 181) says: 'Cibber, with his usual accuracy as to 
dates supposes that Crowne was selected to write a mask for the court in preference to 
Dryden, through the influence of the Duke of Buckingham, who was offended at what 
Dryden had said of him in Absolom and Achitophel — Dryden's poem was not written 
until 1681 — Lord Rochester was the person who recommended Crowne.' " 

57 Works, I, 239. 

58 Biographia Dramatica, II, 77. 
69 Langbaine, 92. 

60 Works, I, 232. 

61 Works, I, 222. 



80 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

of Calisto, and is beloved by Mercury, but treats him scornfully. 
Mercury, finding Jupiter in the Arcadian fields, is at once jealous, 
and fears that Jove's presence is due to amorous inclinations 
towards Psecas. He is soon convinced that his jealousy is un- 
founded, and approves of Jove's scheme to woo the chaste Calisto 
in the form of Diana. This Jove attempts, but is rebuffed by the 
nymph, who threatens to kill herself. After the failure of this 
stratagem, Jupiter attempts to dazzle Calisto in his own form and 
offers her his throne, but all in vain. Angrily he bids the winds 
carry her off. 

Meanwhile Psecas becomes more gracious towards Mercury 
and learns from him of Jove's effort to seduce Calisto. Nyphe 
unfortimately discovers Psecas and Mercury together, and threat- 
ens to reveal the nymph's shame. The fleet-footed god charms 
Nyphe to a grove and promises Psecas to interest Juno in her revenge 
on Calisto. Juno, however, has scented trouble herself, and coming 
to earth finds Jove with Calisto. Jove confesses his love for the 
nymph, but swears that she is chaste and that he admires her most 
for her virtue. Juno threatens revenge, and Jupiter bids airy spirits 
seize and confine her. Thus he forces her to embrace Calisto. 
Mercury, to please Psecas, charms Calisto and Nyphe so that they 
are prisoners in a grove, and hastens to heaven to arouse Juno. 

Upon his return, Mercury promises Psecas her revenge, and 
she gives him a favor to wear. The imprisoned Calisto and Nyphe 
frantically wander about, suspicious of everything. Diana refuses 
to credit Psecas' scandalous charge against Calisto and bids the 
nymphs confine her. Juno interposes and supports Psecas. The 
apparent truth of the charge is revealed when Calisto and Nyphe 
defend themselves against Diana, thinking her Jove in disguise 
again. Calisto wounds Diana and then realizes her mistake. Through 
a trick of Mercury, Nyphe is charged with an amour with that god 
by Psecas. In the face of such evidence, Calisto is condemned to 
death by the weeping Diana, and Psecas promises Mercury her 
favors as a reward for his trickery. Moreover, Juno threatens to 
overthrow Diana and make Psecas goddess of the woods. 

Elated by Juno's promises, Psecas now scorns to fulfill her 
obligations to Mercury. In anger he exposes her before Diana and 
Juno, explaining the whole deception and his part in it. Calisto 
and Nyphe are restored to favor, and a threatened conflict between 
Diana's nymphs and Juno's spirits is averted only by the arrival 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 81 

of Jupiter at the summons of Mercury. He affirms the innocence 
of Calisto, and Nyphe pardons Mercury. Psecas confesses her 
jealous motive, but is received by Juno as her friend. Jupiter 
rewards Calisto and Nyphe by giving them the joint dominion of a 
star. 

The masque is preceded by an elaborate prologue of allegorical 
figures, and each act is followed by a little pastoral portraying the 
loves of Daphne and Sylvia with Strephon and Corydon. 

As Langbaine was perhaps the first to point out,®^ Calisto 
is founded on Ovid's Metamorphoses, Lib. II, fables 5 and 6.*® 
Briefly stated, Ovid's story is as follows : As a result of the terrible 
disaster which has befallen the world through the folly of Phaeton, 
Jupiter goes to restore Arcadia; and there sees Calisto, daughter 
of King Lycaon, who is a nymph of Diana and best beloved by her. 
She lies down in the heat of the day in a grove, and is there visited 
by Jupiter in the form and dress of Diana. He embraces her pas- 
sionately and does not reveal himself without violating her vir- 
ginity. She resists but to no avail. Later when Diana approaches 
her, she fears it is Jove, but is reassured by the presence of nymphs. 
In the course of time Diana discovers her condition while the nymphs 
are bathing one day, and she is ejected from the company. Juno, 
who is aware of Jupiter's fault, delays punishment of Calisto until 
her son Areas is born. She then turns the mother into a bear. 
In this form she continues for fifteen years, until one day she 
meets her son Areas hunting in the woods. He is about to pierce 
his mother with a spear when Jove interposes and turns them both 
into constellations. Juno is very angry but all in vain. 

The choice of such a story for a dramatic performance at court, 
the parts of which were to be taken by young princesses and their 
friends, was unfortunate; but in this case the blame rests not 
altogether with the dramatist. Crowne says, "My subject . . . 
was not, I confess, imposed upon me by command, but it was for 
want of time to find a better : for I had but some few hours allowed 

62 Langbaine, 92. 

63 The story of Calisto had been used before Crowne's time by at least one English 
dramatist. Thomas Heywood in The Golden Age, printed 1611, (Collected Works of 
Thomas Heywood, London, 1874, III, 1-79.) in his dramatization of the fall of Saturn 
and the rise of Jupiter gives over parts of Acts II and III to the Calisto incidents. 
Although Heywood is more faithful to Ovid than Crowne, he has altered some incidents 
which the latter left unchanged. In Heywood's play Jupiter first sees Calisto at the 
court of her father. King Lycaon. When Jove conquers the latter, the daughter is at 
his mercy; but she tricks him into granting her request, which is to join Diana's sister- 
hood. By another change Juno does not enter into the Calisto incidents in any way. The 
mother in human form is pursued by her son Archas and is rescued by Jove. Archas 
thereafter remains with his father. Cf. edition cited above, Acts II and III, pp. 23-37: 
44-5; 55. 



82 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

me to choose one."^* It is evident, moreover, that he was aware 
of the difficulties before him; for he writes "I employed myself 
to draw one contrary from another; to write a clean, decent, and 
inoffensive play on the story of a rape, so that I was engaged in 
this dilemma, either wholly to deviate from my story ... or 
by keeping to it, write what would be unfit for Princesses and 
Ladies to speak, and a court to hear."^* Naturally Crowne chose 
the former method. He eliminated Areas completely and made 
Jupiter unsuccessful in his attempts upon the chastity of Calisto. 
In order to give greater substance to the plot he added three char- 
acters: Nyphe, a sister of Calisto; Psecas, a proud and envious 
nymph, whose revengeful nature and vaulting ambition help mater- 
ially to involve the action; and finally Mercury, who in his pursuit 
of the fickle Psecas, assists greatly in the entanglement, but who in 
the end serves as the resolving force. 

In spite of this clever alteration of Ovid's story, the difficulties 
which Crowne had to face were considerable. He was limited in the 
number of speaking characters to seven, of which the roles were 
all to be taken by ladies of the court. Of these only two were to 
appear in the guise of men. He experienced difficulty also with 
the prologue and songs, "the nature of which," he writes, "I was 
wholly a stranger to, having never seen anything of the kind."^^ 
The old-time court masques, which were so popular with the nobility 
in the reigns of James I and Charles I, had been swept away by the 
Puritan revolution; and with the establishment of the court drama 
at the Restoration, no serious effort was made to revive this form 
of entertainment. If we may believe the testimony of CoUey Cibber, 
Crowne's Calisto was the only approach to this kind of theatrical 
spectacle in the Restoration period.^® It is not surprising, therefore, 
that the young playwright experienced difficulty with those parts 
of the piece which were most characteristic of the masque genre. 

The success of the piece was notable, there being from twenty 
to thirty performances of it in a period of less than two months; 
but its success depended much less upon literary merit than upon 
the spectacular staging, and upon the fact that the principal roles 
were taken by members of the nobility. The two princesses, Mary 
and Anne, played Calisto and Nyphe; Lady Henrietta Wentworth 

64 Works, I, 237. Maidment and Logan are probably correct in supposing that the 
suggestion of the Calisto incidents came from Charles II himself. Cf. IVorks, I, 231. 

66 Works, I, 237. 

QQ An Apology for the Life of Colley Cibber, op. cit., II, 209; Paul Reyher, Les 
Masques Anglais, Paris, 1909, p. 475. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 83 

took the part of Jupiter, and the Countess of Sussex, that of Juno ; 
Lady Mary Mordant represented Psecas, while Mrs. Blagge,^^ a 
maid of honor to the queen, played the part of Diana, and Mrs. 
Jennings, who served in a similar capacity to the Duchess of York, 
that of Mercury .^^ Others of the noble young ladies served as 
nymphs of Diana's train, while among the men who danced was 
the Duke of Monmouth. In addition professional actors and 
actresses were called in to play the prologue and to sing the choruses 
between acts.^^ 

Some evidence as to the elaborateness and splendor of the cos- 
tumes has come down to us. Margaret Blagge, the Mrs. Godolphin 
of Evelyn's memoir, wore apparel "amounting, besides the Pearles 
and Pretious Stones, to above three hundred pounds. "^*^ These 
pearls and precious stones Evelyn says in another place were worth 
nearly twenty thousand pounds."^^ The two princesses and the 
other four ladies who had major parts were doubtless as ex- 
pensively attired. As for the costumes of the host of persons who 
took part in the numerous entries provided by the piece, we are 
fortunate in having an itemized bill for habits made by John Allen 
and William Watts, tailors to Charles 11."^^ The document is en- 
titled, "An aoompt of such things as wer delivered to Mr. Cabbin 
for his Maties Great Ball from the 8th of December, 1674, till the 
12 of Jany. next enshewing, as foil. viz. by Jon. Brown." Here 
follows an itemized Hst of materials used such as 'whealbon', 
canvas, 'weiar', searing 'candell', 'pasbord', and cotton 'riband'. This 
account is followed by a list of "Mascarading Habitts made by John 
Allen," and a similar list by William Watts. Here prices are listed 
for costumes for such performers as combatants, 'saityrs', 'windes', 
sea-gods, 'boyes in the cloudes', 'Aryell spritts', 'the genious of the 
cuntry', 'one cupitt', the 'Emperour of America', and many others. 
In another part of the document is given the quantity of material 
necessary to complete the costume of a shepherd, satyr, wind, or 

67 Evelyn {The Life of Mrs. Godolphin, op. cit., pp. 52-55) has given an interesting 
account of Margaret Blagge, who played the part of Diana. She was more serious- 
minded than most of the members of Charles II's court at the time. When she was 
off-stage between entries, she did not mingle with the gallants as the other young ladies 
did, but "under pretence of conning her next part, was retired into a Corner, reading 
a booke of dewotion, without att all concerning herselfe or mingling with the young 
company." 

68 For an account of the nobility who took part in Calisto, see Maidment and Logan, 
Works, I, 222, 228-31; 327-40. 

69 The actors and actresses so honored were Hart, Turner, Mrs. Davis, Mrs. Knight, 
Mrs. Butler, and Mrs. Hunt. Mrs. Davis and Mrs. Knight were both mistresses of the 
king. 

70 Evelyn, The Life of Mrs. Godolphin, p. 54. 
IX Ibid., p. 53. 

12 Notes and Queries. 2nd Series, VI, 517-20. 



84 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

combatant. The habit of a combatant, for example, required a 
yard or more each of scarlet satin, green satin, silver tabby, gold 
tabby, and gold fringe. Many yards each of scarlet and silver 
galoon, and narrow and broad gold galoon were necessary. Dozens 
of 'Jewells' of all sorts and silver and gold roses were also used. 
Finally the tailors summarized their bill as follows : 

£ 
"The whole of maskrads first bill 440 

The segund bill 030 

Payed Devoe 030 

The sprigs of corall 002—12-06 



502—12-06" 

These items are naturally only a small part of the expense 
involved in producing Calisto. The total doubtless amounted to sev- 
eral thousand pounds. 

The title-page of the original quarto of Calisto, 1675, styles it 
"the late masque at Court," and no doubt it was a masque which 
Crowne was engaged to write. If by masque, however, we mean 
the species of court entertainment which reached its point of highest 
literary and artistic development in the combined efforts of Ben 
Jonson and Inigo Jones at the courts of James I and Charles I, 
Calisto does not belong to the genre. John Evelyn in his diary 
calls it a 'comedie' on one occasion, and a 'pastoral' on the other."^^ 
The latter term seems to describe it more exactly than the word 
'masque'. Reyher says that it resembles the pastorals played by 
Henriette-Marie. He calls it a "Masque without masquers."^* 
Certainly the concluding parts of each act are pastoral in their nature. 

The literary merits of Calisto are not great. Even the author 
was conscious of its faults and rated his talents very humbly in 
his dedication to the princess Mary. Yet in justice we must admit 
that he was compelled to write in haste. His skill is shown, not 
in the production of any memorable lines or passages, but in the 
cleverness with which he changed the Ovidian story to suit the 
needs and taste of his courtly audience. I agree with Miss Marks^** 
that the prologue is "most extraordinary," but even that might well 
have been impressive with its costumes and music, and dancing. 

In general, the critics have found little in Calisto to comment 

73 Diary of John Evelyn, op. cit., II, 305. 

74 P. Reyher, Les Masques Anglais, p. 476. Cf. also Jeannette Marks, English 
Pastoral Drama, London, 1908, p. 61; and Herbert A. Evans, English Masques, [1897] 
Introd. p. iv, note 2. 

76 J. Marks, op. cit., p. 61. 



LIFE AXD DRAMATIC WORKS OF TOHX CROWXE 85 

on favorably. Genest objects to the length; but says the piece 
''does Crowne credit rather than otherwise. "'^ Miss Marks finds 
the style "abstract, generalizing," and "containing many of the 
abstractions of eighteenth century poetry." For Reyher "la piece 
est mortellement ennuyeuse."'^ Evelyn gives this contemporary 
opinion: "The Poem . . . however defective in other partic- 
ulars, was exactly modest, and suitable to the Persons. "^^ 

THE COUNTREY WIT 

After the court success of Calisto, Crowne next turned his 
attention to prose comedy and wrote The Conntrey Wit, which 
was produced at the Duke's Theatre in Dorset Garden probably 
very late in 1675, or early in 1676. Apparently it met with con- 
siderable success, for Crowne says in his dedication to the Earl 
of Middlesex that it "withstood the battery of a whole party, who 
did me the honour to profess themselves my enemies,"^® and that 
it was honored by the favor of King Charles II. ^° Such approval 
was a valuable asset ; for of Charles II Langbaine wrote shortly 
after his death, "The most judicious part of ^Mankind will readily 
acknowledge [him] to be a sovereign Judge of W'it."^^ How often 
the piece was played in the last quarter of the seventeenth century 
we have no means of ascertaining, but between the years 1704 and 
1727 it was acted at least ten times.^^ According to Genest it was 
revived for the last time at Drury Lane on January 20, 1727, after 
a lapse of five years. It was then played "about three times. "^^ 
It was originally published in a quarto bearing the date 1675.®* 
A second edition appeared in 1693, and a third in 1735. 

The plot of The Countrey Wit runs thus : After having virtually 
promised his daughter Christina in marriage to Ramble, Sir Thomas 
Rash announces to her that she is to marry Lady Faddle's nephew, 
Sir Mannerly Shallow, a country gentleman from Cumberland with 
two thousand pounds a year. Christina demurs and Isabella, her 

76 Genest, I, 182. 

77 Reyher, op. cit.. p. 476. 

78 Evelyn, Life of Mrs. Godolphin, op. cit., p. 53. 

79 Works, III, 16. 

80 Works. Ill, 17. 

81 Langbaine, 94. 

82 For dates of revivals, see Genest, II, 305, 326, 394, 396, 404, 431, 579, 639: III, 
51, 186. 

83 Ibid., Ill, 186. Grosse, p. 19, misquotes Genest when he says the piece was last 
performed in 1720. 

84 According to Arber {Term Catalogue, I, 236) The Countrey Wit was published 
between February 10, 1676 and June 19, 1676. 



86 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

maid, is insolent ; but the irrascible old man insists. He has a bond 
for one thousand pounds from Lady Faddle that her nephew will 
marry Christina on a certain date. Lady Faddle now announces 
the expected arrival of Sir Mannerly on the morrow. She also 
takes occasion to inform Christina that Ramble is a dissolute man- 
about-town who courts Betty Frisque, a wench kept by Lord Dry- 
bone. Christina does not believe her, but determines to spy on 
Ramble. She finds Ramble's fiddlers serenading Lady Faddle, ap- 
parently, and swears to forget her love. 

Meanwhile Ramble serenades Betty Frisque at Lord Drybone's ; 
and Sir Thomas, looking for Ramble, mistakes Drybone for him 
and thinks the former is trying to seduce Christina. Drybone, for 
his part, thinks that Sir Thomas has an intrigue with Betty. Ramble 
innocently becomes involved in the confusion and is accused by Sir 
Thomas. In the plot to prove Ramble's perfidy, Isabella disguised, 
entices him to visit her lady whose husband, she says, is away. 
Ramble reveals his amorous nature and is trapped by the ruse, 
only to be condemned by Christina. Sir Thomas, convinced that 
Christina was with Ramble in the dark, accuses her of being a 
"slut" and orders her out of the house. Ramble decides to reform, 
but when his man Merry comes with a plan for him to secure Betty 
Frisque by posing as a limner, he falls from grace. In lieu of 
Drawell, the limner, who writes Drybone of his inability to come, 
Ramble starts to sketch Betty's picture ; and when Merry comes to 
distract Drybone, he pleads his cause. Drybone, in a fit of jealousy, 
is about to eject Ramble when Lady Faddle interposes. Later Betty 
goes to Ramble's lodgings, only to find two other women waiting for 
sittings. Betty has just concealed herself when Lady Faddle arrives 
and insists on a picture. 

Meanwhile Sir Mannerly Shallow and his man Booby have 
arrived in London, and after many farcical blunders reach Lady 
Faddle's residence. Sir Thomas follows Lady Faddle to Ramble's 
lodging and there is about to arrest her for forfeiture of her bond 
when he learns of Sir Mannerly's arrival. Christina appears and 
forces Ramble to proclaim her innocence. She now consents to 
marry Sir Mannerly. While Ramble goes to seek out Mannerly 
and rid himself of his rival. Mannerly mistakes the porter, Tho^nas 
Rash, who has the same name as his master. Sir Thomas, for the 
knight and insists on marrying his daughter. The porter is honest, 
but his wife presses the match for her daughter Winnif red. Ramble 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 87 

discovers Sir Mannerly and gives him the choice of being run 
through or of returning to Cumberland. Ramble makes no headway, 
however, in his affair with Christina, and seems likely to fail, when 
Drybone appears in pursuit of Betty and assists in clearing up the 
confusions of the previous evening. Drybone agrees to settle five 
hundred a year on Betty. Sir Thomas now espouses the cause of the 
penitent Ramble, and Christina accepts him. Sir Mannerly, mean- 
while, has married Winnifred, and learns to his sorrow that she 
is a porter's daughter. He is forced to accept the situation. Sir 
Mannerly's man Booby is made the victim of a beggar-v/oman, who 
exchanges her bastard child for a bag of gold. 

In this his first comedy Crowne gives many indications that 
he was following the popular vogue for prose comedy which by 
1675 had received a considerable impetus from the work of Sir 
Robert Howard, Sir Charles Sedley, Sir George Etherege, and 
William Wycherley. Like Etherege and Wycherley, our author 
chose prose as his medium ; like them also, but to a greater extent, he 
went to Moliere for suggestions as to plot and characters. His 
smaller degree of originality prompted him to use the work of the 
great French comic poet with greater freedom than he was to be 
guilty of in his later comedies. Crowne's indebtedness to Moliere 
in The Countrey Wit extends all the way from direct borrowing of 
plot and dialogue in one instance, to faint reminiscences of Mol- 
ieresque characters. ^^ 

The most obvious borrowing is one which Langbaine took par- 
ticular delight in pointing out.^® The sub-plot of The Countrey Wit, 
which involves Betty Frisque, Lord Drybone, Ramble, and Merry, 
is taken from Moliere's Le Sicilien, ou L' Amour Peintre. The fid- 
dlers whom Ramble employs to serenade Betty correspond to the 
musicians used by Hali to arouse Isidore. ^^ The song sung to Betty 
may well have been suggested by the two songs in Le Sicilien.^^ 
Lord Drybone's entry upon the stage in a nightgown with a drawn 
sword imitates the entry of Dom Pedre in night cap and dressing 
gown, and with a sword.®^ Drybone's remark "Who's there?" and 
Merry's reply, "A friend," accompanied by an exchange of ear- 
cuffing, translates Dom Pedre's "Qui va la?" and Hali's reply, 

85 For accounts of Crowne's indebtedness to Moliere in The Countrey Wit, see Grosse, 
20-2.'";; H. Van Laun in Le Molieriste, III, 58-9, 137; D. H. Miles. The Influence of 
Moliere on Restoration Comedy, appendix, 227-8. 

86 Langbaine, 94. 

87 The Countrey Wit, Act II, Le Sicilien, sc. 2, 3. 

88 The Countrey Wit, Act II, p. 48-9, Le Sicilien, sc. 3, 8. 

89 The Countrey Wit, Act II, p. 50, Le Sicilien, sc. 4. 



WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 



"Ami."®*' When beaten, Lord Drybone calls for assistance, naming 
several of his servants, as George, Peter, Thomas, — names which 
Dom Pedre used under a similar embarrassment. The device which 
Adraste uses to get into the presence of Isidore is the same which 
Merry suggests to Ramble for the conquest of Betty Frisque. 
Adraste uses a letter from his friend Damon the painter to hood- 
wink Dom Pedre; Ramble uses one from Drawell, which is in part 
almost a translation of Moliere.®^ 



''Gardez-vous bien surtout de lui 
parler d'aucune recompense; car 
c'est un homme qui s'en offense- 
rait, et qui ne fait les choses que 
pour la gloire et pour la reputa- 
tion." 

The dialogue which follows where Ramble recalls the story of 
Apelles is almost a word for word translation.®^ 
'*J'ai lu, je ne sais ou, qu' Apelle 'T remember a story of Apelles: 



"Have a care I beseech your 
lordship not to speak to him of 
any recompense, for he is a gen- 
tleman of quality, and draws 
only for his own divertisement." 



peignit autrefois une maitresse 
d' Alexandre, et qu'il devint, la 
peignant, si eperdument amou- 
reux, qu'il fut pres d'en perdre 
la vie; de sorte qu' Alexandre, 
par generosite, lui ceda I'objet 
de ses voeux. Je pourrois faire 
ici ce qu' Apelle fit autrefois ; 
mais vous ne feriez pas peutetre 
ce que fit Alexandre." 



Apelles once drew the picture of 
a mistress of Alexander the 
Great; and, as he was painting 
her, fell so passionately in love 
with her that he was ready to 
die. Alexander out of pure gen- 
erosity, bestowed her upon him. 
I could do as Apelles did; but 
my lord, I am afraid your lord- 
ship will not prove an Alexander 
the Great." 



"J'ai tou jours de coutume de 
parler quand je peins . . . 
pour reveiller I'esprit, et tenirles 
visages dans la gaiete necessaire 
aux personnes que Ton veut pein- 
dre." 



"My lord, on the contrary, I dis- 
cource out of regard to my pen- 
cil; to quicken the spirits, and 
put a briskness and gaiety in the 
face."®3 

As Hali attracts Dom Pedre's attention in the guise of a Spaniard, 
so Merry in the habit of an attorney distracts Lord Drybone. Like 
Adraste, Ramble seizes the opportunity to press his suit, and like 

90 The Countrey Wit, Act II, p. 51, Le Sicilien, sc. 4, 

91 The Countrey Wit, Act IV, p. 91, Le Sicilien, sc. 10. 

92 The Countrey Wit, Act IV, p. 93, Le Sicilien, sc. 11. 

93 The Countrey Wit, Act IV, p. 93, Le Sicilien, sc. 11. 



LIFE AXD DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWXE 89 

him he pretends to be explaining a mole when Drj'bone returns. 
Beyond these external features Crowne did not copy ]Moliere. Lord 
Drybone is much more suspicious than Dom Pedre. Throughout, 
Isidore, the slave, is a much higher type than Betty Frisque. Hali's 
ruse for distracting Dom Pedre is more clever than ]\Ierr}''s to at- 
tract Drybone's attention. Finally Crowne makes no effort to use 
Moliere's clever denouement. 

In addition to these obvious borrowings from Le Sicilien, 
there are other instances in which Crowne manifestly drew sug- 
gestions from Moliere's plays. Grosse has pointed out that the 
hard-hearted father who sacrifices his daughter's choice in marriage 
to his own self-interest is a t}^e which Moliere used frequently.®* 
Sir Thomas Rash belongs to this type; in fact, the main plot of 
The Coimfrey Wit turns on his insistence that Christina shall marry 
Sir ^lannerly Shallow and his two thousand pound income, rather 
than Ramble to whom she had been promised. There is a similar 
situation in Tartu ffe, where Orgon announces to his daughter Mar- 
iane that she must marry Tartuffe after he had promised her to 
Valere. The contentions^ that this situation provided Crowne with 
a suggestion for his main plot is supported by the fact that the 
scene in which the maid Isabella impertinently opposes Sir Thomas®^ 
is drawn from a similar scene in Tartuffe where the impertinent 
Dorine opposes Orgon's plan to join Mariane to Tartuffe.®" Orgon's 
motive in disposing of his daughter, however, is not a sordid one, 
as in the case of Sir Thomas. In this respect Crowne's suggestion 
probably came from Monsieur de Pourceaugtiac, where Oronte 
would marry his daughter to the Limoges lawyer, because the latter 
has an income of three or four thousand crowns.^* There are other 
reasons for thinking that our author had this play in mind in writing 
The Counrtey Wit. Both plays are excursions in low comedy, and 
both achieve some of their comic effects by the tricks which are 
played on de Pourceaugnac and Sir Mannerly. Furthermore these 
two characters are residents of country districts who are coming up 
to the city to marr\' girls they have never seen. On the other 
hand, contrary to Van Laun's suggestion,®® it seems to me that Sir 

84 Grosse, p. 22, note 2. Orgqn in Tartuffe, Harpagon in L'Avare, Argan in Le 
MaJade Imagmaire, Oronte in Monsieur de Pourgeaugnac, and Jourdain in Le Bourgeois 
Gentilhomme are examples of this type. 

86 Cf. Grosse, p. 23; and Miles, appendix, pp. 228-9. 
96 The Countrey Wk, Act I, p. 19 ff. 

87 Tartuffe, Act II, sc 2. 

88 M. de Pourceaugnac, Act I, sc 1. 

99 H. Van Laun, Lcs Plagiaries de Mclitre en Anglcterre, Le Sfolieriste, III, 59. 



90 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Mannerly Shallow is entirely English and owes next to nothing 
to M. de Pourceaugnac. 

In another instance Grosse found a model in Moliere's George 
Dandin for the scene in The Countrey Wit in which Ramble is 
tricked by Isabella into forcing his way to her mistress.^°° Isabella 
cleverly compels Ramble to repeat after her an apology for his 
intrusion and a statement of his desire. This, according to Grosse, 
is modelled on two scenes in George Dandin in which M. de Soten- 
ville forces his son-in-law to repeat after him apologies to Clitandre 
and Angelique.^°^ The dramatic device is the same in Crowne and 
in Moliere, but the purpose of it is entirely different. Dandin is 
being made to apologize humbly, while Ramble is merely carrying 
out a suggestion which will advance his desires. Grosse further 
notes the similarity between the confusion in the darkness, in George 
Dandin where Dandin is mistaken by Lubin for Claudine, and in 
The Countrey Wit where Lord Drybone and Sir Thomas Rash both 
mistake each other for Ramble.^°^ Such a use of darkness to cause 
mistaken identity is a common device of a playwright, however, 
and need not be attributed to Moliere. It was frequently used in 
the Restoration period. 

As has already been hinted, Crowne is also indebted to Moliere 
for suggestion of characters. Isabella is clearly modelled upon 
Dorine in Tartuffe, with whom she shares an extreme impertinence. 
Like Dorine, Isabella is chiefly concerned lest her mistress be 
forced to marry contrary to her inclinations, and assists her to 
thwart the efforts of her father.^^^ Lady Faddle likewise was 
doubtless suggested by the type of neglected marriage-mad aunt 
to be found in Moliere in the characters of the Comptesse d'Escar- 
bagnas and of Belise in Les Femmes Savantes. As Grosse has said, 
Lady Faddle has excessive sensibility and secret longing in common 
with the Comptesse d'Escarbagnas,^^* but she is thoroughly English, 
nevertheless. 

Although Crowne was chiefly indebted to Moliere for material 
and suggestions, English influences, I believe, were not entirely 
lacking. In two instances at least, he seems to have borrowed sug- 
gestions from recent comedies of Wycherley and Etherege. The 
gushing exchange of compliments between Sir Thomas Rash and 

100 The Countrey Wit, Act III, p. 60. 

101 George Dandin, Act I, sc. 6, and Act III, sc. 7. 

102 The Countrey Wit, Act II, pp. 4,9-S\— George Dandin, Act II, sc. 3. 

103 Toinette in Le Malade Jmaginaire is another maidservant of the Dorine type. 

104 Grosse, p. 26. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 91 

Lady Faddle in which each tries to outdo the other, would seem 
to owe its origin as a comic device to a similar exchange of sar- 
castic flattery between Alderman Gripe and Mrs. Joyner in Wycher- 
ley's Love in a Wood (1671).^*^^ Furthermore, Wycherley's Lady 
Flippant may well have been in Crowne's mind when he drew Lady 
Faddle. The former hypocritically inveighs against marriage, but 
all the while she has secret amorous longings for a husband. She 
pursues Dapperwit much as Lady Faddle pursues Ramble to his 
lodgings, where she insists on a picture.^^^ Etherege's She Would 
if She Could (1668) seems to have suggested to Crowne the incident 
in which Isabella goes to Ramble's lodgings with Christina's know- 
ledge to trap him into a disclosure of his falseness.^^^ She says her 
mistress is a married lady whose husband is out of town, and who 
languishes for his presence. Isabella makes it clear that she has 
acquainted Ramble with this out of charity, since her mistress knows 
nothing of her visit. Ramble is to feign an excuse for gaining ad- 
mittance. In Etherege's play Sentry, following Lady Cockwood's 
instructions, calls at Courtal's lodgings to procure a visit from him 
to her mistress. She pretends that she does it on her own account, 
and warns Courtal to have some excuse other than her visit to gain 
an entry.^^^ 

When we consider the variety of sources to which Crowne 
must have gone for his material in The Countrey Wit, it becomes 
apparent that he has shown considerable skill in adapting his bor- 
rowings. As Grosse has said, this first comedy is a rare mixture 
of dependence and originality. Although Ramble plays the part of 
Adraste of Le Sicilien in the sub-plot, he is not drawn from him, 
but is an original character with Crowne, and without doubt a 
realistic figure from the time. Christina is also an independent 
creation. In moral purity she is rather exceptional among the hero- 
ines of Restoration comedy. Sir Mannerly Shallow, as we have 
seen, may be a faint reminiscence of Monsieur de Pourceaugnac, 
but on the other hand, he is thoroughly English and probably comes 
straight from characters of that day. In the case of Sir Mannerly 
and his man Booby, Crowne sacrificed accurate realism in portrayal 
for low comedy effects. Both are caricatures rather than characters. 
Lady Faddle likewise is overdrawn for comic effect. Lord Dry- 

105 The Countrey Wit, Act I, pp. 33-4 — Love in a Wood, Act I, sc. 1. Mermaid ed. 
of Wycherley, pp. 15-16. 

106 The Countrey Wit, Act IV, p. 100 — Love in a Wood, Act I, sc. 2, pp. 27-8; and 
Act III, sc. 4, pp. 76-7. 

107 The Countrey Wit, Act III, pp. 55-6. 

108 Etherege, She Would if She Could, Act I, sc. 1, Ed. Verity, p. 123. 



92 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

bone and Betty Frisque owe their origin to Dom Pedre and his 
Greek slave Isidore, but as characters they are completely made 
over. Drybone is a debauched old nobleman; and in opposition to 
Isidore, who is noble even though she is a slave, Betty Frisque 
is a gay adventuress who sells her wares to the highest bidder. Sir 
Thomas Rash may be indebted to Orgon and Oronte for his be- 
havior towards Christina, but his character is his own. He has that 
wholesome dislike for the frivolity and licentiousness of London 
society which many an elderly man must have felt in 1675. 

Portions of The Countrey Wit belong to the comedy of manners, 
— a, type to which Etherege and Wycherley had just given its pecu- 
liar Restoration qualities, — but Crowne is right when in his dedica- 
tion he classifies his play as low comedy, "because a great part of 
it consists of comedy almost sunk to farce." The technique of the 
play is characteristic of the comedy of the period. The exposition 
which follows the scene from Moliere's Tartuffe is swift, but the 
action of the main plot develops slowly. Complication of the situa- 
tion is achieved only by the use of an elaborate sub-plot, and in 
the end the main plot is resolved through the self-elimination of 
Sir Mannerly. 

THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM, PART I. 

The two parts of The Destruction of Jerusalem were published 
in the spring of 1677,^°^ and in all probability they were being 
acted in January or February of that year. Up to this time all of 
Crowne's productions except Calisto had been given by Betterton at 
the Duke's Theatre. The new two-part play, however, was pro- 
duced at the Theatre Royal with Kynaston and Hart in the roles 
of Titus and Phraartes, and with Mrs. Boutell and Mrs. Marshall 
playing Clarona and Berenice. ^^° The reason for the change of 
theatre is found in a document first reprinted by Malone, which 
contains a protest by the King's men addressed, as Malone thinks, 
to the Lord Chamberlain, Henry Bennet, Elarl of Arlington in 
1678. It recites an agreement between the King's company and 
Dryden whereby the latter, in return for a share and a quarter in 
the company, equal "communibus annis" to three or four hundred 
pounds, contracted to write three plays a year. Although Dryden 
produced scarcely a play a year, the company had not held him to 

109 Arher, Term Catalogue, I, 273. 

110 Roscius Anglicanus, p. 13. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 93 

his agreement, and at his request had even given him a third day 
for his last new play, All for Love. "Yet notwithstanding this kind 
proceeding," continues the protest, "Mr. Dryden has now jointly 
with Mr. Lee (who was in pension with us to our last day of play- 
ing and shall continue) written a play called Oedipus, and given it 
to the Duke's company, contrary to his said agreement, his promise, 
and all gratitude, to the great prejudice and almost undoing of the 
company, they being the only poets remaining to us. Mr. Crowne, 
being under a like agreement with the Duke's House,' writt a play 
called The Destruction of Jerusalem, and being forced by their re- 
fusal of it to bring it to us, the said Company compelled us after 
the studying of it, and a vast expense in scenes and cloathes, to buy 
off their clayme, by paying all the pension he had received from 
them; amounting to one hundred and twelve pounds paid by the 
King's Company, besides neere forty pounds he the said Mr. 
Crowne paid out of his own pocket. "^^^ 

From this petition it appears that the Duke's Company refused 
Crowne's two plays, and that he carried them to the King's Men 
and got them accepted. The reason underlying the refusal is to be 
found, in all likelihood, in the previous acceptance by the Duke's 
Company of Otway's adaptation of Racine's Berenice and Moliere's 
Les Fourheries de Scapin. It would not have been poHcy for one 
company to produce in the same season plays so similar in story 
as Otway's Titus and Berenice and the second part of The Destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem. Otway's two adaptations were licensed for 
printing on February 19, 1676-77,^^^ and were advertised in the 
Term. Catalogue as having been published in Hilary term ; i. e. 
between November 22, 1676 and February 12, 1677.^^^ Even 
Crowne himself in his epistle to the reader refers to "a gentleman 
having lately translated that play, [Racine's Berenicel and exposed 
it to public view on the stage."^^* It is likely, therefore, that Otway's 
adaptation somewhat antedated the appearance of The Destruction 
of Jerusalem on the stage, and that it was the cause of the refusal 
of Crowne's plays by the Duke's men. 

The success of Crowne's two-part play was very remarkable, 
and is somewhat puzzhng when we consider of what stuff and in 
what manner it was made. The author himself in his epistle to 

111 Malone, The Prose Works of John Dryden, I, pt. I, 73-75. 

112 See the title page of the first quarto of Titus and Berenice. 
lisArber, Term Catalogue, I, 267. 

114 Works, II, 238. 



94 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

the reader refers to the world as "having been kind to these 
plays"."^ Furthermore in a letter prefixed to the edition of The 
Works of the Earl of Rochester, Roscommon, and Dorset, London, 
1731, supposed to have been written by St. Evremond to the 
Duchess of Mazarin, there is a statement that "Mr. Crowne's 
'Destruction of Jerusalem' .... met with as wild and unaccount- 
able success as Mr. Dryden's 'Conquest of Granada'."^^^ Besides 
the original edition of 1677, quartos of the play were published in 
1693 and 1703. 

The argument of the first part is as follows : Chafing under 
the oppression of Rome, the people of Jerusalem appeal to Queen 
Berenice, who claims the Jewish throne in succession to her slain 
brother Agrippa. There is passionate love between her and Titus 
Vespasian. Upon her approach to the city, the people nearly mob 
her, but she is rescued by Phraartes, the young exiled king of 
Parthea, who is in love with Clarona, daughter of Matthias, the 
high priest. Monobazus, slayer of B'erenice's brother, assists at her 
rescue and is smitten by her charms. Within Jerusalem the 
Pharisees, under the leadership of Eleazar arid John, are planning 
a revolt from Matthias with the aid of the Edomites. The rebels 
are defeated, however, through the bravery of Phraartes and Mono- 
bazus, who goes disguised and is styled *The Unknown'. While 
Berenice tells her maid of the beginning of her love for Titus, 
Phraartes complains of Clarona's coldness, and Monobazus con- 
fesses that he. slew Berenice's brother. To Phraartes' entreaties 
Clarona opposes her religious vow of chastity. 

While Matthias and Phineas are keeping guard against the 
Edomites, they are amazed by strange portents in the heavens, such 
as the appearance of an aerial army, by a severe storm, by a prophet 
crying woe, and by an angel who prophesies the doom of Jerusalem. 
Phraartes and Monobazus witness these phenomena. The latter 
is astonished, but the former is skeptical of anything supernatural, 
and jests. A meeting of the Sanhedrim is called, and while the 
counsellors are in session, "from foggy clouds a sleepy unguent 
falls" upon them with soporific effects. Meanwhile John, Eleazar, 
and the Pharisees prepare to murder Matthias and his followers 
in holy zeal. The ghost of Herod gloats over the sleeping coun- 
sellors, and they awake from horrid dreams in time to flee from 

115 Works, II, 235. 

116 Works, II, 218. Maidirent and Logan quote this passage. I have been unable 
to see the edition referred to. 



LIFE AXD DrL\MATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWXE 95 

their enemies. John falsely accuses Matthias of concealing Caesar's 
image in the city. The latter replies by branding his accuser as 
a traitor. 

In the fight which follows Phraartes and Monobazus are 
awakened and rush out to battle. Berenice and Clarona are both 
frightened. The former wishes for Titus, while Clarona prays 
for Phraartes, thereby revealing to Berenice a lively interest in 
him. Matthias, fighting bravely to guard the temple, is captured 
by John and the Pharisees. They prepare to kill him when Phraar- 
tes comes to the rescue. Although Clarona previously had banished 
the Parthian king from her presence, she now meets with him 
when she seeks out her father. The latter wishes to reward 
Phraartes for his service, and the king desires Clarona. After a 
long debate between the lovers concerning heavenly devotion and 
earthly love, he is forced to take her without despoiling her virginity, 
The play ends with news of a Roman army moving against 
Jerusalem. 

The action, as we have just seen, centers around the rebellion 
of the seditious Pharisees under John and Eleazar, and the civil 
war between them and the forces of the highpriests ^>Iatthias and 
Phineas. The source of this material is the De Bello Judaico of 
Josephus. The main historical incidents are drawn from Book 
IV, Chapters 3 to 5. John and Eleazar retain their names and 
chief characteristics from Josephus. In Matthias Crowne repre- 
sents the high-priest Ananas, while Phineas corresponds only very 
roughly to the high-priest Jesus. A detailed comparison of the 
three chapters mentioned above with Crowne's play clearly estab- 
lishes the relation between the tw^o. In Act I the characterization 
of John and the Pharisees as a usurping zealot sect by Matthias, 
Sagan, and Phineas; the treacherous attitude of John; his lies to 
the zealots about Matthias ; and his efforts to involve the Idumeans 
— all this is drawn from chapter 3.^^' In Act I also, the announce- 
ment of the arrival of the Edomites, the shutting of the gates, 
and Matthias' direction to Sagan to harangue the Idumeans are 
taken from chapter 4.^^^ The determination of the Edomites to 
fight in spite of the appeal of Sagan, is found in the same chapter."' 
At the end of Act II and at the beginning of Act III a violent 

llT The Destruction of Jerusalem, Part I, Act I, p. aSO-S-l — De Judaico Bello. Lib. 
rv, cap. 3, §51, 2, 7, 9, 12-14. Hereafter in the fcx>tnotes immediately following I shall 
refer to the play only by page and to De Bello Judaico as Bell. Jud. 

118 Works, II, 2S4-5— Bell. Jud., Lib. IV, cap. 4, §§1, 3. 

118 IVorks, II, 258-9— Bell. Jud., Lib. IV, cap. 4, §4. 



96 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

storm with its portents is discussed by the characters. Such a storm 
Josephus describes in Chapter 4.^^° When, in the violence of the 
storm, the Pharisees force the city gates and let in the Idumeans, 
Crowne follows a similar incident in the Jewish history."^ In 
Josephus, Ananas allows his guards to sleep because of the nature 
of the storm, but the dramatist employs a supernatural effect to put 
the Sanhedrim to sleep.^^^ Although Matthias is captured by the 
Pharisees in the last act, as Ananas was by the Idumeans, the play- 
wright brings his hero Phraartes to the rescue and the catastrophe 
is delayed until Part 11.^^^ 

Crowne's indebtedness to Josephus is by no means limited to 
Book IV of De Bello Judaic o. The airy army which appears in 
the sky coincident with the storm, and which is discussed with 
such wonder by the high-priests and Pharisees, is the elaboration 
of a suggestion in the fifth chapter of Book VI.^^* The waking 
prophet who cries woe to Jerusalem in Act III is Crowne's use of 
an incident in the same chapter in which a plebeian named Jesus 
cries, "Woe, woe to Jerusalem" for seven years. The prophet's 
words in the play approximate a translation of the words of 
Jesus, the husbandman, as a comparison will show. Jesus says : 
"A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the 
four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice 
against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against the 
whole people."^^^ Crowne's prophet says: 

"From the four winds and the earth's hollow womb, 

A voice, a voice — a dreadful voice is come; 

A voice against our elders, priests and scribes, 

Our city, temple, and our holy tribes; 

Against the bridegroom and the joyful bride. 

And all that in Jerusalem reside. "^^^ 
It is likely that the characters of Monobazus and Phraartes 
were suggested to Crowne by the Antiquitates Judaicae of Josephus. 
The former is described by the playwright in his dramatis per- 
sonae as "brother to the king of Adiabene." His history is related 
in Book XX of the Antiquitates. There are a few points of 

120 Works, II, 268-72; 271-77— Bell. Jud., Lib. IV, cap. 4. 55. 

121 Works, II, 282-S7— Bell. Jud., Lib. IV, cap. 4, §§6, 7. 

122 Works, II, 287-90— Bell. Jud., Lib. IV, cap. 4, 5 §6, 7. 

123 Works, II, 299— Bell. Jud.. Lib. IV, cap. 5, 52. 

124 Works, II, 268-72; 275-77— Bell. Jud., Lib. VI, cap. 5, 53. 

125 Bell. Jud.. Lib. VI, cap. 5, 53. The passage is quoted from William Whiston's 
translation of The Works of Flavius Josephus, Oxford, 1839, IV, 267. 

126 Works, II, 271. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 97 

resemblance but the poet has pretty generally altered his character."^ 
Josephus mentions Phraates twice in the Antiquitates,^^^ but 
Crowne's character is so entirely divergent from that of any of 
the Parthian kings of the name, that it seems likely that he merely 
borrowed a name. Phraates IV, to whom Josephus refers, had this 
in common with Crowne's Phraartes; he was driven from his 
kingdom by rebels. He sought refuge with the Scythians, and with 
their assistance won back his domain.^^® Phraartes also was suc- 
cessful in regaining his kingdom. It is possible likewise that Crowne 
may have read the Historia Romana of Dio Cassius for the account 
of Titus and Berenice in Rome. A further perusal of the same 
work would have made him acquainted with a more detailed account 
of Phraates IV.^^° A third possible source for the suggestion of 
the name is the heroic romance of Cleopatre by La Calprenede, 
which had been published in 1657, and of which an English trans- 
lation had appeared from 1659-1668. In this romance Prince Tyri- 
dates, in relating to Queen Candace the story of his life, gives an 
account of the inhuman cruelty of his brother Phraates, who slew 
his father and his other brothers. Tyridates himself escaped by 
flight to Judea.^8^ 

The role of Berenice is subordinate to that of Clarona in 
Part I of The Destruction of Jerusalem. She is not concerned 
with the main action to any great extent. On one occasion, how- 
ever, by way of exposition for Part II, Crowne has her tell her 
maid Semandra the story of the courtship between her and Titus 
at Rome.^^^ For this account the poet may have been indebted to 
Dio Cassius,^®^ or to Suetonius's life of Titus ;^^* or he may have 
developed the incident from Racine's play. The characters of 
Clarona and Phraartes are creations of the author. 



127 Compare Works II, 264-5 with Antiquitates Judaicae, Lib. XX, cap. 2, 651-2 
and cap. 4, §§1-3. 

128 Antiq. Jud.. Lib. XV, cap. 2, §3; Lib. XVIII, cap. 2, §4. 

129 Geo. Rawllnson, The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy, London, 1873, p. 208. 
180 Dio Cassius, Historia Romana, Lib. 49, cap. 23-28, 31, ZZ, 39, 41, 44. 

131 Hymen's Praeludia, or Love's Master-Piece . . . rendered into English, by 
Robert Loveday, London, 1668. Part I, Lib. 1, 2; Part III, Lib. 3, 4; Part IX, Lib. 
3. For a summary of this romance, see J. Dunlop, History of Prose Fiction, London, 
1814, III, 195-203. 

132 Works, II, 260-1. 

133 Dio Cassius, Lib. 65, cap. 15. 

134 Suetonius, History of the Twelve Caesars, translated by Philemon Holland, 1606. 
Tudor Translations, London, 1899, II, 229. 



98 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM. PART II 

The two parts of The Destruction of Jerusalem were doubtless 
performed on successive afternoons. The conclusion of Part I is 
indecisive, and probably it was intended to attract the curious to 
the performance of the second part. The "wild and unaccountable 
success" which the plays achieved must have been due in large 
measure to the more theatrical effects and the more sensational 
scenic devices of Part II. On July 1, 1712, the second part was 
revived by the summer company at Drury Lane. The play bill 
states that it had not been acted for fifteen years.^^** 

The plot of this part may be stated thus : The Roman army is 
before Jerusalem under the command of Titus, who in a struggle 
between glory and love for Queen Berenice, has delayed to attack 
for three months. His generals and soldiers are growing clamorous 
for action. Tiberias urges him to give up the queen and he reluc- 
tantly consents; but in the presence of her charms he cannot dis- 
miss her, and sorrowfully departs. Meanwhile in Jerusalem 
Matthias and Phineas are troubled by approaching starvation and 
pestilence, and the machinations of the rebellious Pharisees under 
Eleazar and John. The latter, at the suggestion of his followers, 
usurps the high-priest's mitre with pretended reluctance. Phraartes 
in despair of winning Clarona, has been idle, but now she confesses 
her love for him, and he goes with new zeal to the fight. Berenice 
is much disturbed by Titus's silent dismissal, and upon his return 
from a victorious assault upbraids him for unkindness. He pro- 
tests his love but again departs in sorrow. Meanwhile, John in 
pontifical vestments seizes Matthias and accuses him of conspiring 
with Rome. Again Phraartes comes to the rescue of the latter. 
Later the Parthian king finds Clarona weeping over a book and 
enters into an argument with her about a future life. They are 
interrupted by Parthian leaders, who tell Phraartes of the restora- 
tion of his crown and of the demand of the army for his presence. 
He is thus forced to leave Clarona behind in Queen Marianne's 
tower. 

The departure of Phraartes gives the Romans new courage, 
and Tiberias again urges Titus to forsake Berenice. Titus has 
not courage to face her, but Tiberias consents to give her the 
message. The unfortunate queen is pursued by other suitors. 
Monobazus, who forsook Phraartes to defend Titus, now discloses 

1»B Genest, II, 499. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWXE 99 

his passion, and the kings Malchus and Antiochus visit her with 
similar intentions. The share of I^Ionobazus in King Agrippa's 
death is revealed, and Berenice condemns him. \\'hen Tiberias 
announces the determination of Titus to part with her, she will 
not believe it; and the general tells her she may have it from her 
lover's own lips. The interview ensues. Titus explains the Roman 
law against foreign queens and emphasizes the demands of glory. 
She for her part upbraids him and swears to die. In Jerusalem 
the situation grows worse. Emboldened by the absence of Phraartes, 
John, Eleazar and the Pharisees surprise ^Matthias and his coun- 
sellors and kill them. Clarona is wounded in the struggle. Phraartes, 
who has been rejoined by Monobazus, returns to Jerusalem and 
finds Clarona mortally wounded. She dies in his embrace. After 
a fit of madness, he plunges into the fighting %^'ith enfuriated vigor. 
The temple is fired by the Pharisees. Titus goes to oppose the 
mighty feats of Phraartes and conquers only when a tower of the 
temple falls on the latter. Titus and Berenice meet once again. 
He persuades her to forgo death, but is firm in his dismissal. 
Once she is gone, however, he curses the fate which parted him 
from his love. 

As in Part I, Crowne is indebted to Josephus for his material 
concerning the siege and destruction of Jerusalem.^^^ In the De 
Bello Judaico this account occupies Books \^ and VI. From them 
the play^'right utilized the frequent descriptions of famine, pesti- 
lence, and horror in the city. In Act II a Pharisee is shown 
snatching bread from a poor woman. This incident is probably 
based on chapter 10 of Book V.^^' In the same act, the desire of 
Eleazer to get free from the leadership of John and to assume the 
mitre himself is an echo of his revolt in chapter 1 of the same 
book.^'* The final slaughter of Phineas, Sagan, and Matthias in 
the last act may go back to the murder of Ananas and Jesus by the 
Idumeans; or it may be a reflection of the death of Matthias, a 

136 According to R. B. McKerrow (.Gttll's Horn Book by Thomas Dekker, London, 
1904, Introd. p. ii) "the fall of Jerusalem was a favourite subject with Elizabethan 
writers and moralists." There were at least two plays on the subject. W. W. Greg in 
his edition of Hensloue's Diary, II, 155, lists a play called 'Jerusalem' by Thomas L«gge 
which dates from ca. 1577. It was played by Strange's men in the spring of 1591-92. 
J. O. HaUiwell-Phillips in his Illustrations of the Life cf Shakespeare, Part first, London, 
1874, p. 56, records a pageant or tragedy acted by the Smiths Company of Coventrv in 
1584. It was written by John Smith of St. John's College, Oxford, as the entry in the 
CoTentry_ Municipal MSS. shows: "Paid to Mr. Smythe of Oxford the X\\ daye of 
Aprill, 1584, for his paynes for •writing of the tragidye, xiij. U. vi. s. viij. d-" In 1598 
ino~as Dekker published a poem called Cancans Calamus on the same subiect. Cf. 
The S on- Dramatic Works cf Thomas Dekker, edited by A.' B. Grossart, I, 1-69. 

IS- Works. II, 3i7—BeU. Jud., Lib. V, cap. 10, §§2-3. 

138 Works, II, 338-9— BW/. /»d.. Lib. V, cap. 1, §2. 



100 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

high-priest, and his three sons at the hands of Simon.^^® The burn- 
ing of the temple is drawn from the description in Book VI. 
Although Crowne may be indebted to Racine for his use of Anti- 
ochus, he is historically justified by Josephus for making him an 
assistant of Titus at the siege of the city.^*° Josephus also makes 
mention of one Malichus, king of the Arabians, in his De Bello 
Judaico;^^^ but like Phraates IV he lived in the time of Herod. 
He may, however, have suggested the name 'Malchus' to the dram- 
atist. 

Just as Clarona and Phraartes are the predominant figures in 
Part I, so in Part II the roles of Titus and Berenice are most 
important. Corneille and Racine had both written plays in 1670 on 
the subject of the parting of the Roman emperor and the Jewish 
queen. As Crowne says in his epistle to the reader, "Some persons 
accused me of stealing the parts of Titus and Berenice from the 
French play written by Mr. Racine on the same subject." He then 
continues, ''But a gentleman having lately translated that play and 
exposed it to public view on the stage, has saved me that labour, 
[of justification] and vindicated me better than I can myself ."^*^ 
Let us see how far Crowne's assertion that "borrowing or stealing 
from Mr. Racine could not have supplied my occasions,"^*^ is justi- 
fied. Certain differences between the two plays are at once apparent. 
The action of Racine's piece takes place at Rome. Crowne, on the 
other hand, has juggled the facts of history; he has relegated the 
early courtship of Titus and Berenice to a period antedating the 
siege of Jerusalem, and provided for their final parting at the siege. 
Another striking difference in the two plays is formed in the part 
of Antiochus. In the French drama he plays a considerable role 
as a more or less formidable rival to Titus. In Crowne's play he is 
only a despairing suitor on a footing with Malchus, while Monobazus 
takes his place as a more important rival. 

It would be an injustice to Crowne to accuse him of attempting 
an adaptation of Racine's play, but he was manifestly influenced 
by the Frenchman's work. Incidents in Racine are frequently par- 
alleled in the English work, as a detailed study will show. The 
scene in the first act in which Tiberias counsels Titus to give up 
Berenice, arguing that Rome would not permit a foreign queen to 

189 Works, II, 378-9— BW/. Jud., Lib. IV, cap. 5, 82; Lib. V, cap. 13, {1. 
\^o Bell. Jud.. Lib. V, cap. 11, §3. 

141 Bell. Jud., Lib. I, cap. 14, 51. 

142 Works, II, 238. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 101 

reign, draws frequent suggestions from Racine's scene where Titus 
asks the advice of Paulinus/*^ The resolve of Titus to part with 
Berenice is received by Tiberias and PauHnus in each case with 
surprise but with praise. By Racine, Titus is made to say 

"Ah! que sous de beaux noms cette gloire est cruelle!" 
while in Crowne he says 

"Oh ! we with specious names ourselves deceive, 
And solid joys for empty titles leave." 
In the same scene the interview between Titus and Berenice, with 
Tiberias and Semandra in the background, parallels Racine's play 
in some particular turns of dialogue.^** The sudden departure of 
Titus in each is noteworthy. Again, the startled comments of 
Berenice and Semandra imitate those of Berenice and Phoenice.^*^ 
Crowne's use of Antiochus of Compagene as a lover of Berenice 
was suggested by Racine.^*® In Act IV the renewed arguments 
which Tiberias uses against Berenice in a long speech owe much 
to a similar speech of Paulinus.^*^ Monobazus is utilized by Crowne 
to assume somewhat the same role as active lover of Berenice which 
Antiochus performs in the French play. Berenice's sudden sus- 
picion that Titus may be jealous of Monobazus seems to owe its 
origin to a similar expression which Racine puts into the mouth 
of the Jewish queen.^^^ In the English play, Tiberias, however, 
takes the place of Antiochus as a messenger of dismissal. The 
final pronouncements of the former and the speeches of Berenice 
and Semandra which follow are very like those in a scene of 
Berenice}^^ Semandra's request that Berenice calm her disorder and 
replace her veil before she sees Titus, and her reply that he shall 
see what distress he has wrought closely parallel similar dialogue in 
Racine. ^^*^ The last interview between Titus and Berenice in Act 
V opens with dialogue very like that in the final act of Racine's 
play.^^^ 

The foregoing comparison indicates that while Crowne's obli- 
gations to Racine were considerable, they were confined to occa- 
sional imitations of minute features of the Frenchman's work, and 

143 Works, II, 329-31 — Berenice, Act II, sc. 2. 

144 Works, II, ZZ2-Z— Berenice, Act II, sc. 4. 

145 Works, II, 333-4 — Berenice, Act II, sc. 5. 

146 Works, II, 348, 362. 

147 Works, II, 363 — Berenice, Act II, sc. 2. 

148 Works, II, 366 — Berenice, Act II, sc. 5. 

149 Works, II, 369-70 — Berenice, Act III, sc. 3. " ! 

150 Works, II, 371 — Berenice, Act IV, sc. 5. ' ' " . 

151 Works, II, Z9Q— Berenice, Act V, sc. 5. 



102 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

to a utilization of the general aspects of the story as he had developed 
it. The English writer's language is his own throughout. Indeed 
he never allows the speeches of his characters to become so tediously 
long as they are in Racine. The general atmosphere is also very 
different. Racine is altogether concerned with the tragic parting of 
the lovers. Crowne is concerned with this also, but he displays 
it upon a background of warfare, military activities, and the con- 
fusion resulting in the destruction of a great city. 

Although Titus assumes the major role in Part II, Phraartes 
is the conspicuous romantic hero of the whole piece. Here, as in 
Part I, he owes something of his heroic calibre, of his lordly air, 
of his mighty strength in battle, to the suggestion of his famous 
predecessor, Almanzor, in Dryden's Conquest of Granada. He is 
not, however, an imitation of Dryden's hero; he is rather another 
projection of the same general type. His boastings are few as 
compared with those of Almanzor. His nearest approach to the 
high-flown rant of the latter is uttered in a fit of madness. After 
the death of Clarona he exclaims: 

"Where is Clarona gone? 
Aloft ! — I see her mounting to the sun ! — 
The flaming Satyr toward her does roll, 
His scorching lust makes summer at the Pole. 
Let the hot planet touch her if he dares — 
Touch her, and I will cut him into stars. 
And the bright chips into the ocean throw."^**^ 
Most of the historians of literature who have paused to com- 
ment on the two parts of The Destruction of Jerusalem have been 
struck by the fact that two such mediocre and uninteresting plays 
were great successes on the stage.^^^ Maidment and Logan alone 
have a good word to say for the versification, and they greatly 
overestimate its qualities when they compare it favorably with Dry- 
den's work in The Conquest of Granada}^^ Crowne's couplets 
seldom rise above the level of that mediocrity which they achieved 
in his earlier rimed play Charles VIII. None of the characters is 
particularly vital or interesting, and the plays have all the defects 
characteristic of the heroic type. An explanation of the unmerited 

152 Works, II, 383. 

163 Genest, I, 205, remarks that "it is not easy to say whether the plan or the 
execution of them is the worse." A. T. Bartholomew in The Cambridge History of English 
Literature, VIII, 190, says: "It seems incredible that such a piece as The Destruction 
of Jerusalem could ever have gained the marked success which it undoubtedly secured." 

164 Maidment and Logan, Works, II, 219, write, "if the 'Conquest of Granada.' 
otherwise called Almanzor and Almahide,' was received with such extraordinary applause 
It creates little surprise that the 'Destruction of Jerusalem' met with similar success 
tor so Jar as regards versification Crowne not infrequently equals, if not surpasses, 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 103 

applause with which they were greeted is to be found, doubtless, 
in the scenic possibilities which they afforded. That alone could 
have made them attractive even to an uncritical Restoration audience. 

THE AMBITIOUS STATESMAN 

In the epilogue to the first part of The Destruction of Jerusalem, 
Crowne wrote, speaking for himself, 

"First for his rhyme he pardon does implore 
And promises to ring those chimes no more."^^^ 
His determination to quit the heroic couplet can be traced to the 
influence of Dryden, who in the prologue to Aureng-Zehe (1675), 
remarks that 

"he has now another taste of wit ; 
And to confess a truth, though out of time, 
Grows weary of his long-loved mistress, Rhyme."^'*® 
One of the results of Dryden's decision was the production of his 
greatest play, All for Love (1678) in blank verse. In a similar 
way Crowne turned from the extremes of the heroic drama and 
produced a blank-verse tragedy, The Ambitious Statesman, in 1679. 
Like its two-part predecessor, The Destruction of Jerusalem, 
it was acted at the Theatre Royal; but unlike those plays, it was 
not a success. It was played, in all probability, in the spring of 
1679, since it is recorded in the Term Catalogue as having been 
published in the Trinity term of that year; that is, between May 
and June 1679.^^^^ Apparently it was somewhat in demand by the 
reading public, as a second edition was published two years later, 
in the spring of 1681.^^^ The ill success of the piece is to be 
explained in part, at least, by the disturbed condition of England 
and especially of London when it appeared. As Crowne himself 
puts it in his preface, "This play . . . was born in a time so 
unhealthy to poetry that I dare not venture it abroad without as 
many cloaths as I can give it to keep it warm."^*^® England was 
then in the throes of the so-called Popish Plot, when every Catholic 
was suspected of harboring villainous intentions against the pro- 
testant population. It is not strange, then, that with so much real 
and apparent villainy around them, the London theatre-goers did 

186 Works, II, 311. 

156 The Works of John Dryden, edited by Scott and Saintsbury, V, 201. 

i57Arber, Term Catalogue, I, 359. 

iBSlbiU, I, 446. 

180 Works, III, 146. 



104 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

not relish a play whose central figure is an arch-villain. It is prob- 
able that both theatres suffered a considerable diminution of patron- 
age on account of the distractions of the time, if we can accept 
Growne's evidence in his prologue: 

"In this broil no shelter can be found 
In our poor play-house, fallen to the ground. 
The time's neglect and maladies have thrown 
The two great pillars of our play-house down; 
The two tall cedars of the vocal grove, 
That vented oracle of wit and love, 
Where many a nightingale has sweetly sung."^^*^ 

The argument of The Ambitious Statesman runs as follows: 
King Charles of France has dismissed the Constable from his 
council, and the latter, shorn of power, — the one thing which makes 
life worth while for him, — plots rebellion. He has invited Henry 
V of England to attack France, and he has enraged the Duke of 
Burgundy. Moreover, he wins La Force, a great commander, to 
his cause; and plots against his own son, the Duke of Vendosme, 
who is the favorite of the king. Having learned from La Guard, 
the maid of Louize de Guise, of the love and secret contract between 
her mistress and his son, the Constable intercepts their correspond- 
ence, and forges letters so that it appears to Louize that Vendosme 
is courting the Princess of Lorraine. This is accomplished through 
the aid of La Guard. As a result Louize in a fit of angry jealousy 
secretly marries the Dauphin, who has been a rival suitor for her 
hand. Louize early laments her match and arouses the Dauphin's 
jealousy, but she reassures him by means of a trick. The king still 
shows his displeaure towards the Constable, but allows him to retain 
his estates on account of his son Vendosme. The Constable, grow- 
ing desperate, impudently accuses the Dauphin and his favorite, 
Brisac, of treason. Brisac is imprisoned ; but the king is suspicious, 
and seizes the fortunes of accuser and accused that there may be no 
bribery. 

Meanwhile Vendosme returns from the battle-front and is 
graciously received by the king. He is a man who has held himself 
aloof from the vices of the world, and one who pays little heed to 
fame. Vague rumors which he has heard concerning Louize are 
confirmed by the Constable who tells him she is "whored" by the 
Dauphin. In an effort to involve his son, the Constable says that 

leo Works, III, 148; See also the epilogue, Works. Ill, 241. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 105 

his murder is planned, and that Brisac has been racked for opposing 
it. By pretending great indignation Vendosme leads his father to 
reveal his nefarious plot, and lays plans to thwart him. The ap- 
pearance of Louize and the Dauphin together seemingly confirms 
the rumor he has heard about them, and in an interview he and 
Louize accuse each other without clearing up the falsehood. Ven- 
dosme resolves to bury himself in some solitude, but before he can 
depart, finds himself again in the presence of Louize and the Dau- 
phin. She prevents a fight between the rivals. Meanwhile Vendosme 
has revealed his father's rebellious plot to the king, and the Con- 
stable is arrested. The latter has tricked his son into the belief 
that Brisac was racked ; and when the evidence is found to be false, 
the Constable is released. Although the king protects Vendosme, 
the Dauphin and the Constable plot his downfall together. 

In his desperate game of plotting, the Constable forces La 
Guard to arrange a meeting between Louize and Vendosme, at which 
the latter learns that he has been slandered and his letters forged. 
The Constable compels La Guard to confess that she did it for 
the Dauphin. Meanwhile the Dauphin is enticed to become a wit- 
ness of the scene. In his rage he wounds Louize, but is disarmed 
by Vendosme, who spares him only because of his royal blood. 
Thereupon the Dauphin continues his favor to the Constable on 
condition that he do away with his son. The Constable makes a 
further effort to pervert Vendosme's loyalty, but finds him still 
faithful. Louize dies in his arms in prison, and the Dauphin again 
orders him to be racked. The prince openly breaks his promise of 
favor to the Constable, and the latter leads Vendosme's troops against 
him. The racked Duke, however, bids them be loyal to the Dauphin 
and seize his father. La Guard confesses the Constable's arch-vil- 
lainy and he is condemned to death. In his last agonies Vendosme 
asks to be buried with Louize. 

The story which Crowne here develops has the appearance of 
being a chapter out of the history of France in the first quarter 
of the fifteenth century; but a closer scrutiny convinces one that 
it bears little relation to French history, but that, on the contrary, 
in its larger aspects it is entirely the invention of the playwright. 
A remark made by the Constable at the very beginning of the play 
indicates that the action is supposed to take place in the reign of 
Charles VI. The Constable says, 

"I've sent a secret invitation 
To their brave fiery young King, Henry the fifth, 



106 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

And I've enraged the Duke of Burgundy, 
That he has enter'd into league with him."^'* 
Historically such a remark might have been made with some ap- 
proach to truth by Count Bernard d'Armagnac/®^ who was Con- 
stable of France from 1415 to 1418, and for many years the rival 
of the Duke of Burgundy for ascendency in the realm. During his 
brief period of power, d'Armagnac showed a tyrannical disposi- 
tion. According to Mezeray, "He rendered himself daily more 
odious by Exactions, without measure, equality, or justice, laid 
upon the Clergy as well as the Laity."^^^ Again, "The Constable 
chose rather to see the Kingdom lost than his Authority, and the 
Burgundian consented rather to have it dismembered by the Eng- 
lish, then governed by his Enemy. "^®* In 1418 Paris was betrayed 
into the hands of the Burgundians, and d'Armagnac and his fol- 
lowers were massacred. In these quotations appear certain char- 
acteristics of d'Armagnac which Crowne's constable also possesses. 
Like d'Armagnac he is tyrannical and cruel, and lust for power is 
the motive force of all his villainy. 

In other respects, however, the ambitious statesman of 
Crowne's piece is so unlike d'Armagnac that we may feel sure he 
was only remotely suggested by the historical figure. Some of the 
differences between the two characters will make this clear. Crowne's 
villain, after having been in power for ten years as constable, is 
dismissed by the king. Thereupon he becomes disloyal and plots 
successively against the king, his son, and the Dauphin. He is 
absolutely unscrupulous in the means which he uses to accomplish 
his ends. On the other hand, d'Armagnac was constable for only 
three years ; he was not disloyal to the feeble Charles VI, but strug- 
gled against Burgundy and met his death at the hands of the lat- 
ter's forces. 

Even though there were a closer parallel than there is between 
the Constable and d'Armagnac, it would still remain true that the 
central action of the play is unhistorical. The Duke of Vendosme as 
a son of Count d'Armagnac, his love affair with Louize de Guise, 
and his rivalry with the Dauphin, are all fictitious. So too are the 
roles of the Dauphin and Brisac. Moreover, from an historical 

161 Works, III, 152. 

1<J2 Langbaine, 91-2, first conjectured that Bernard d'Armagnac was the original 
of Crowne's Constable. Cf. Mezeray, A General Chronological History of France, trans- 
lated by John Boutell, London, 1683, p. 434. 

163 Mezeray, p. 434. 

164 Mezeray, p. 435. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 107 

point of view, Isabella, the queen of Charles VI, was a storm center 
during the period with which the play pretends to deal; yet she 
receives no mention whatever. 

There remains to consider a bit of evidence given by the author 
himself, which seems to indicate invention on his part. In the 
preface he says, "I had heaped together all the fancy I had to place 
myself out of the reach of my enemies."^^^ Crowne's enemies ac- 
cused him, not without some show of justice, of borrowing from 
Racine in his The Destruction of Jerusalem}^^ In his new play, 
therefore, he aimed to put himself "out of reach" of his enemies 
by inventing practically the entire plot. This would seem to be a 
fair interpretation of his statement. 

Concerning the literary value of The Ambitious Statesman, 
we have the author's own estimate of its merits. Writing in 1679, 
he thought it the "most vigorous" of all his "foolish labours."^*^ 
We may accept his opinion. The play reveals considerable skill 
in plot construction; there is a noticeable reduction in the number 
of characters necessary to tell a complicated story. Moreover, the 
blank-verse is fluent, and at times has real poetic touches.^®® 

THE MISERIES OF CIVIL- WAR, 

otherwise known as 

HENRY THE SIXTH, SECOND PART 

Crowne's next play was a direct reflection of the political and 
religious turmoil which grew out of the Popish Plot. The fear of a 
Catholic uprising, and the efforts of the Whigs under Shaftesbury 
to preserve the Protestant religion by the only feasible method, as 
they thought, — the exclusion of James, Duke of York, from the 
throne, — nearly plunged England into civil war. To the patriotic 
Tories, who favored the attitude taken by Charles II, the situation 
was an alarming one. They did not relish the Catholicism of the 
Duke of York, but they were strong in their support of royalty, and 
chose to accept a Romish prince, rather than to see the principle of 
kingly succession shaken. Crowne was a natural Tory and felt the 
grave possibilities of the situation. Hence, either at the suggestion 
of the leaders of his party, or of his own free will, he prepared 
to dramatize the evil effects of civil strife as an object lesson to the 

186 Works, III, 146. 

166 See my discussion of The Destruction of Jerusalem, Part II, supra; cf. also 
Works, II, 238. 

167 Works, III, 146. 

168 For example, see the speeches of the Duke of Vendosme, Works, III, 177, 183. 



108 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

public. For this purpose he turned to the Shakespearean trilogy of 
Henry F//®^ and out of portions of the second and third parts de- 
veloped a tragedy which he called The Miseries of Civil-War. It is 
reasonable to suppose that if Crowne had not meant to point a 
moral, his artistic sense as a practicing playwright would scarcely 
have led him to resort to the less inspired plays of Shakespeare for 
purposes of adaptation. There is evidence, moreover, that the 
thought of political propaganda was uppermost in his mind. In the 
prologue he satirizes those who 

"fight and brawl 
About Religion but have none at all. 
Most fiercely for the Road to Heav'n contend, 
But never care to reach the Journeys end." 
A few lines later he explains his purpose : 

''Besides this Tragedy a Rod will prove, 
To whip us for a Fault, we too much Love, 
And have for ages liv'd, call'd Civil Strife."^^° 
The epilogue is more specific still; it advises the nation to learn 
a lesson from the War of Roses, to put down the Catholics and 
dissenters, and thus to prevent further strife.^"^^ 

Crowne's first adaptation of Shakespeare was apparently acted 
some time in the early part of 1680, since it was advertised in the 
Term Catalogue as a publication of the Easter term — that is, between 
February and May, 1680."^ It was played at the Duke's Theatre, 
but with what success it is impossible to state.^'^ It was first 
published, as we have seen, in 1680, under the title, The Miseries 
of Civil-War, without either dedication or epistolary preface, a 
rare circumstance among Crowne's plays.^^^ In the following year 
it was reissued under a new title, Henry the Sixth, the Second 
Part, as a companion volume to Crowne's adaptation of an earlier 
part of Shakespeare's trilogy. ^"^^ No modern reprint exists, 

180 In my discussion of Crowne's adaptation of the Shakespearean Henry VI plays 
I have left out of account any consideration of the authorship of the Elizabethan pieces. 
Crowne thought of the two parts of Henry VI which he altered as plays of Shakespeare, 
and used them as such. 

170 The Miseries of Civil-War, Prologue. 

mlhid.. The epilogue, p. 72. 

i72Arber, Term Catalogue, I, 394. 

173 In the epilogue to Henry the Sixth, the First Part (1681) Crowne writes, 

"But he who did reform this Play does swear 
He'll not bestow rich Trappings on a Horse, 
That will want Breath to rtm a Three-days Course." 
Possibly it is a reference to the previous failure of The Miseries of Civil-War. 

174 Thy est es and Regulus are the only other examples. 
178 Arber, Term Catalogue, I, 462. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 109 

since Maidment and Logan exclude it from their edition of Crowne's 
works. 

In the time of Charles II the works of Shakespeare were not 
regarded with that reverence which the critics of the two following 
centuries held for them. They were frequently adapted by the 
playwrights of the Restoration to conform, as they thought, to the 
more refined tastes of their own era. Only widespread ignorance of 
the great master's plays could have made possible Crowne's brazen 
statement in the prologue in regard to his adaptation : 
"For by his feeble Skill 'tis built alone, 
The Divine Shakespeare did not lay one Stone. "^^^ 
The facts are otherwise. To pursue our author's figure of speech, 
one might say that, in reality, Crowne considered the Shakespearean 
edifice old-fashioned and out of accord with the dramatic structures 
of his own day; whereupon he tore down a large part of the old 
building, and adding some new material to the old lumber and 
masonry, erected a structure, in a mixed type of architecture, the 
main outlines of which were old, but of which the ornaments and 
style were new. A tabular comparison will make this clear. 
Henry the Sixth The Miseries of Civil-War"'^ 

Part II, IV, 2, 6, 7, 8 1, 1 

V, 1 1, 2 

V, 2, 3 II, 1 

[The latter part of the scene (pp. 17-20) 
is original] 

11,2 

Part III, I, 1 II, 3 

I, 2, 3, 4 Ill, 1 

III, 2 

III, 3 

III, 4 
II, 2, 5, 6 IV, 1 

IV, 2 

III, 2 IV, 3 

IV, 4 

IV, 6 V, 1 

IV, 5 V, 2 

V, 3 

176 The Miseries of Civil-War, Prologue. 

1T7 The scene numbering of The Miseries of Civil-War is my own. In the quarto 
only the act divisions and changes in stage-setting are indicated. 



110 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

V, 2, 5 V, 4 

[Part of the scene (pp. 63-4) is 

original] 

V, 6 V, 5 

[The ghosts, spirits, and close of the 
scene are original] 

The principal features of the Shakespearean plot, as the table 
shows, are retained by Crowne, and are too well known to require 
treatment here. The new material which the Restoration playwright 
introduced was largely for the purpose of increasing the love interest. 
To this end Lady Elianor Butler was added to the dramatis personae 
as a mistress of King Edward, and the Earl of Warwick was trans- 
formed into a lover of Lady Grey. Let us consider the latter altera- 
tion first. 

After the battle of St. Alban's in which the Lancastrians are 
defeated. Lady Grey comes to the battlefield to search for the body 
of her slain husband. Warwick sees her and is enamoured of her 
beauty, but she spurns his offers of love and indignantly departs. 
The most he can do is to see her guarded safely from the field.^^® 
Somewhat later in the play Warwick comes to Lady Grey's chamber 
and entreats her again, arguing that widows are always obstinate. 
He insists on marrying her, but gives her a month in which to 
relent, while he goes to France to procure the Lady Bona as a 
queen for Edward. Lady Grey loathes him, however, and resolves 
to appeal to Edward for her husband's estates so that she may be 
independent.^'® As a result of the interview Grey's widow becomes 
Edward's queen; and Warwick, hearing of the marriage as he is 
about to sail for France, angrily returns and seizes Edward.^®® 
Thereafter the conduct of Warwick follows that of Shakespeare's 
character. There is no historical foundation for the portrayal of 
the earl as a lover of Lady Grey. The love scenes which Crowne 
introduces duplicate in a way Edward's efforts to seduce Grey's 
widow, and the change may have been suggested by that action. 
It is not unlikely, however, that the idea for it was derived from 
Holinshed's account: "All men for the most part agree, that this 
marriage was the onlie cause, why the earle of Warwicke conceived 
an hatred against King Edward, whome he so much before favoured. 
Other [s] affirme other causes; and one speciallie, for that King 

178 The Miseries of Civil-War, II, 1, pp. 17-20. 

179 Ibid., IV, 2, pp. 47-49. 

180 Ibid., IV, 4, pp. 56-7. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 111 

Edward did attempt a thing once in the earles house, which was 
much against the earles honestie (whether he would have defloured 
his daughter or his neice, the certeintie was not for both their 
honours openlie revealed) for suerlie, such a thing was attempted 
by King Edward ; which loved well both to behold and also to f eele 
faire damsels."^®^ 

The additional character of Lady Elianor Butler occupies a 
more considerable part of Crowne's play. Through her it was his 
purpose, apparently, to indicate more definitely Edward's amorous 
nature. The two are first shown together in a room in London. 
On this occasion Edward tries to force her, but she demands an oath 
that he will be constant. His efforts are interrupted by a summons 
to Parliament.^*^ Later Lady Elianor, fearing for Edward's safety, 
seeks him on the battle field. He forgets the perils of the kingdom 
in her presence and seeks a cottage in which to enjoy her. She 
consents reluctantly.^®^ When Richard and Warwick accuse him 
later of neglect of duty, Edward first exposes their own similar sins, 
and then in pardoning them, shows that men as well as kings have 
frailties.^®* After the marriage of Edward and Lady Grey, Lady 
Elianor appears and accuses the king of breaking his oath ; but his 
passion for her is gone, and he is careless of her curses. ^^^ The 
king's discarded mistress last appears in man's habit on the field of 
battle, where she challenges her lover to fight. He gives her a 
mortal wound and then recognizes her. As she dies, she bids him 
hide her evil fame.^®^ 

Although Lady Elianor Butler does not figure, so far as I have 
been able to discover, in the chronicles of Holinshed or Hall, where 
the passionate nature of Edward is revealed, she is nevertheless an 
historical personage.^®^ Sir George Buc in Book IV of his History 
of the Life and Reign of Richard the Third, originally published in 
1646, gives a considerable account of her and of her relations with 

181 Holinshed, Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland, 1808, III, 284. 

182 The Miseries of Civil-War, II, 2, pp. 20-22. 

183 The Miseries of Civil-War, III, 2, pp. 33-4. 

184 Ibid., Ill, 4, pp. 37-41. This scene is probably a sop to the notorious immorality 
of Charles II. 

185 Ibid., IV, 4, pp. 54-5. 

186 Ibid., V, 4, pp. 63-4. 

187 There has been some confusion among the historians concerning Elianor Butler. 
James Gairdner, History of The Life and Reign of Richard III, Cambridge, 1898, pp. 88- 
92, says that in petitioning for the crown in 1483, Richard alleged that when Edward IV 
married Elizabeth Woodville, he 'stood married and troth-plight to one Dame Eleanor 
Butler, daughter of the old Earl of Shrewsbury.' Concerning this allegation Gairdner 
writes: "The evidence of Edward IV's pre-contract with Lady Eleanor Butler rested 
on the single testimony of Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells . . . Ac- 
cording to the bishop Lady Eleanor yielded to his [Edward's] desire on a secret promise 
of marriage made before himself . . . " Cf. The History of Comines. Englished by 



112 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Edward. After commenting upon the amorous and wanton nature 
of that monarch and naming the most famous of his mistresses, he 
says: "Above all for a time he was much speld with Elianor Talbot, 
Daughter of John Talbot Earl of Shrewsbury . . . and . . . 
the Widow of Thomas Lord Butler Baron of Sudesley. Her beauty 
and sweetness of Disposition drew his desire so vehemently, and 
with such respect, that he was suddenly contracted, and after Mar- 
ried by Dr. Thomas [sic] Stillington, Bishop of Bath."^^^ There 
was a child from this connection. Buc tells further how Edward be- 
comes enamoured of Lady Bona of France and sends Warwick to 
negotiate a marriage. Meanwhile he marries Lady Elizabeth Grey. 
"This Marriage," continues Buc, "cast the Lady Elianor Butler into 
so perplext a Melancholy, that she spent herself in a solitary Life: 
and how she died is not certainly known. "^^^ In acquainting himself 
with the history of the period of his play, Crowne may well have 
read Buc's work and thus have received a suggestion for the use of 
Lady Elianor. One point of resemblance strengthens this proba- 
bility. After Edward's marriage to Lady Grey, Elianor accuses 
him of breaking his oath to her. To this he says, 
"I, when I please 
Can have a dispensation from his Holiness." 
She replies, 

"What then his Holiness will be your pardon? 
A very excellent office for a Pope 
To be the Universal Bawd of Christendon."^®" 
Compare Buc's hypothetical remark ; "If after the second Marriage 
. . . he had . . . wrought the Pope's Pardon for breach of 
the Pre-contract with the Lady Elianor ; then his Apostolical Bull of 
Dispensation, for his Post-contract, or Matrimony superintenducted 
. . . might easily have been obtained at Rome, for Money."^®^ 
The death of Lady Elianor, dressed in man's habit, by the hand 
of King Edward, is similar to an incident in Beaumont and Fletcher's 
Maid's Tragedy, in which Aspatia, disguised in male attire, fights 
with Amintor and is mortally wounded by him.^^^ During the 

Thomas Danett 1596, London, 1897, 11, 50, book V, chap. 18; and II, 100, book VI, 
chap. 9. Gairdner is inclined to credit the story which Richard brought forward. Laurence 
Stratford, Edward the Fourth, p. 93, is at variance with Gairdner. He speaks of an 
"alleged betrothal to Lady Elizabeth Talbot," but he is apparently confusing the two 
daughters of John Talbot, first Earl of Shrewsbury. Cf. Diet. Nat. Biog. under Talbot. 

188 George Buck, The Life and Reign of Richard the Third, in A Complete History 
of England by White Kennett, London, 1706, I, 562. 

l89/6td., I, 565. 

190 The Miseries of Civil-War, IV, 4, p. 55. 

191 Buck, op. cit., I, 566. 

192 Beaumont and Fletcher, The Maid's Tragedy, V, 4. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 113 

period from 1663 to 1682 The Maid's Tragedy was one of the old 
stock plays frequently acted/^^ and Crowne must have been familiar 
with it both on the stage and in print. This incident has a prototype 
also in Book III of Sidney's Arcadia, where Parthenia, disguised as 
the Knight of the Tomb, fights with Amphialus, who mor- 
tally wounds her, and then removing her helmet discovers her 
fair hair and beautiful face.^®^ Fifteen years before, Crowne 
had borrowed from the Arcadia for his prose romance 
Pandion and Amphigenia (1665).^^^ Thus the death of Elianor at 
the hands of her seducer may be a reminiscence of both Sidney and 
The Maid's Tragedy}^^ 

The other additions and alterations which Crowne made are of 
less consequence. On one occasion soldiers are shown in a cottage 
attempting to extort money from countrymen, who reveal their 
hoards only after dire threats. Their daughters also are pursued by 
the soldiers. In a drawn scene which immediately follows, the 
countryside is seen in flames. ^^^ These scenes have no particular 
bearing on the plot ; their purpose is rather to warn the audience of 
the horrors of civil war. The chapel scene in which George, Duke 
of Clarence, and Prince Edward, the son of Henry VI, have just 
married the daughters of Warwick, only to learn that Edward has 
escaped from prison and heads an army, is not in Shakespeare.^''^ 
Crowne probably got his information about the marriage from Hol- 
inshed.^^® The final scene of the play is drawn from Shakespeare, 
but it is enlarged by further mechanism to make it theatrically spec- 
tacular. The ghost of Richard II appears and warns the sleeping 
Henry of his approaching death and recites the wrongs of his 
house.^^° As the ghost departs, spirits enter and one attempts to 
soothe Henry's last moments. They sing a dirge and vanish as 
Richard enters for the murder. At the end Edward appears to 
visit Henry, as it were, but finding him dead, begins to fear Richard 
on his own account. He points to the moral of the civil war that 
"A Monarch's Right is an unshaken Rock."^"^ 

193 Genest, I, 334-S; cf. also Langbaine, 212, and Pepys' Diary for Dec. 7, 1666. 

194 Sir Philip Sidney, The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia, London 1898, Book III, 
pp. 317-22. 

195 Walter Raleigh, The English Novel, pp. 99-101. 

196 I am indebted to Dr. Wm. A. Neilson, recently professor of English at Harvard 
for the suggestion of Sidney as a source. 

197 The Miseries of Civil-War, III, 3, 4, pp. 34-36. 

198 The Miseries of Civil-War, V, 3, pp. 60-61. 

199 Holinshed, Chronicles, III, 290, 295. 

200 In a similar way the ghosts of Richard Ill's victims warn him of his approaching 
defeat and death. Cf. Richard III, V, 3. 

201 The Miseries of Civil-War, V, 5, pp. 67-71. 



114 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

The Miseries of Civil-War frequently retains traces of the lan- 
guage of Shakespeare, but seldom without some alterations.^^^ Both 
dramas are written in blank verse, but the older piece shows mostly 
lines with Marlovian regularity such as Shakespeare used in his 
earlier plays. In the Restoration adaptation, however, the author 
employs the freer, swinging rhythm of Fletcher and Shirley. The 
number of lines with feminine endings is very notable. 

On the whole Crowne's adaptation was not very successful. 
His most skilful alteration, perhaps is in the case of Warwick, 
whose love for Lady Grey gives additional motivation for his change 
towards Edward. The introduction of Lady Elianor does no wrong 
to the historical reputation of Edward, but only a Restoration taste 
would call for the role which she plays. Genest considered the 
whole play very bad, but admitted that it had enough of the original 
in it to make it "better than the generality of Tragedies written about 
this time."^°^ A. T. Bartholomew dismisses it as a "hash" of Shakes- 
peare.2«4 

Some forty odd years after the production of The Miseries of 
Civil-War, it was utilized by Theophilus Gibber, the son of Colley, 
for a play which he entitled, "An Historical Tragedy of the Civil 
Wars between the Houses of York and Lancaster in the reign of 
King Henry 6th." In this piece young Gibber followed both Shakes- 
peare and Growne, but retained more of Shakespeare's work than 
Growne had done. His own additions are comprised chiefly in some 
love scenes between Lady Anne, the daughter of Warwick, and 
Prince Edward, Queen Margaret's son. The play was written when 
its author was not yet twenty years old, and Genest is of the opinion 
that Savage may have assisted him in some passages. ^^^ 

HENRY THE SIXTH, THE FIRST PART 

The question of the chronological relation of Henry the Sixth, 
the First Part to The Miseries of Civil-War is an obscure one, but 
the evidence of the printed quartos points to the prior production of 
The Miseries of Civil-War. It was published, as we have seen, in 
the spring of 1680, whereas Henry the Sixth, the First Part was 
not in print until the Michaelmas term of 1681 ; that is, between 

202 A good illustration of Crowne's use of the Shakespearean piece is found in the 
third scene of Act II (p. 23-27). One should compare it with 3 Henry VI, I, 1, lines 

■50-273. 

203 Genest, I, 307. 

204 The Cambridge History of English Literature, VIII, 188. 

205 Genest, III, 110-13. I have not been able to see a copy of Gibber's play. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 115 

June and November of that year.^"® If we accept this order for 
the two plays, there is no difficulty in seeing how the adaptation of 
part two of Shakespeare's Henry VI might have resulted from the 
previous handling of the story from the point of Cade's rebellion 
in The Miseries of Civil-War. At this time in his life Crowne had 
two principal interests other than his desire to recover his estate in 
America ; one was the welfare of the Tory cause, and the other, an 
antagonism to the Catholic religion. In 1680 England was threat- 
ened with civil war as a result of Whig machinations following the 
Popish Plot agitation. Hence Crowne prepared The Miseries of 
Civil-War as a propaganda play. In the course of that adaptation, 
he no doubt discovered the possibilities for satire against the Cath- 
olics in the struggle between the Duke of Gloucester on the one 
hand and Suffolk and the Cardinal on the other. Thus we have in 
Henry the Sixth, the First Part, as Crowne boasts in his dedica- 
tion, "No indifferent Satyre upon the most pompous fortunate and 
potent Folly, that ever reigned over the minds of men, called 
Popery." It was acted at the Duke's Theatre probably some time in 
the first half of 1681. Its career upon the stage was brief; for the 
author himself tells us in the dedication to The English Frier, that 
while it pleased the best men in England and displeased the worst, 
"ere it liv'd long, it was stifled by command."^^^ 

The play before us is a closer adaptation of Shakespeare than 
The Miseries of Civil-War, and even Crowne was willing to admit 
some indebtedness. In the prologue he speaks of mending a good 
old play, and a few Hues later remarks, 

"To day we bring old gather'd Herbs, 'tis true. 
But such as in sweet Shakespear's Garden grew." 
In his dedication, however, he is more brazen and less truthful. Of 
the adaptation he writes, "I called it in the Prologue Shakespeare's 
Play, though he has no Title to the 40th part of it. The Text I took 
out of his Second Part of Henry the Sixth, but as most Texts are 
serv'd, I left it as soon as I could."^*'^ A tabular comparison of the 
two plays act by act, and scene by scene will show how wide Crowne 
was of the truth. 

206 Arber, Term Catalogue, I, 462. W. C. Hazlitt in his Bibliographical Collections and 
Notes, Second Series, p. 151, records a quarto of Henry the Sixth, the First Part dated 
1675, but this is almost certainly a mistake. So far as I have been able to ascertain 
there is no other record of a 1675 edition. Historical considerations practically exclude 
that date. There was no serious occasion then for an anti-Catholic play, and Crowne's 
other plays of that period give evidence that his opposition to the Catholics had not become 
outspoken in 1675. Moreover, the prologue and epilogue refer definitely to conditions at 
the time of the Popish Plot excitement. 

207 Works, IV, 19. 

208 Crowne, Henry the Sixth, the First Part, Dedication, (p. 2). 



116 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Shakespeare's Crowne's 

Henry the Sixth, Part II Henry the Sixth, the First Part 

1, 1 1, 1 

I, 2 1, 2 

I, 3 1, 3 

(the last part of the scene is original) 

I, 3, line 104 ff II, 1 (expanded) 

I, 4 II, 2 

II, 1 II, 3 (some additions) 

II, 2 Ill, 1 (compressed) 

II, 3 Ill, 2 (some additions) 

II, 4 Ill, 3 

III, 1 IV. 1 (expanded) 

IV, 2 
IV, 3 

III, 2 IV, A''' (compressed) 

III, 2, lines 368-378 1 jv c 

III, 3 / ' ^ 

IV, 1, 4 IV, 6 (original setting) 

The plot of Crowne's second Shakespearean adaptation does 

not vary in its essential features from the first four acts of 2 Henry 
VI. The most noteworthy change is in the part of the Cardinal 
whose role is much enlarged, since he is the vehicle of Crowne's 
purpose to add *'a little vinegar against the Pope."^^^ Accordingly 
he is a much more active villain than in the Shakespearean piece. 
It is he who suborns the three murderers, "soft tools of the church," 
he calls them, "who will win heaven" by killing Glocester, a heretic. 
Two of the murderers believe the Cardinal, but the third is doubtful. 
He is in the business for the money, to feed his wife and children, 
having lost much time and wages praying and observing fast days. 
Moreover, he has found prayers to Thomas a Becket and a "high 
dutch Lady" unavailing. To resolve his doubt he asks the Cardinal 
embarrassing questions, but is silenced by a threat to burn him 
alive as a heretic. Thereupon the murderers strangle Glocester in 
a drawn scene, whereas in Shakespeare the murder is not shown.^^^ 
Later the Cardinal's conscience begins to prey upon him; and he 

209 Through a mistake of the printer, doubtless, there is no fifth act indicated in the 
quarto of Henry the Sixth, the First Part. It was probably intended that Act V should 
include the last three scenes, embracing the discovery of Duke Humphrey's death, the 
banishment of Suffolk, the agony and death of the Cardinal, and the narrative of Suffolk's 
death. 

210 Crowne, Henry the Sixth, The First Part, Prologue; II, 3, pp. 22, 23, 26; 
IV, 1, pp. 47-8. 

211 Ibid., IV, 2, 3, pp. 50-55. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 117 

breaks into a cold sweat and swoons at the appearance of the ghost 
of the murdered Duke. Finally, to add a little touch of irony, the 
three murderers enter and jest with him about infallibility. ^^^ Of 
this new material, the satire upon the prayers of the third murderer, 
Crowne tells us in the dedication, was drawn from prayers sug- 
gested in contemporary French manuals of devotion. The ghost 
of Glocester does not appear in the older play, but there is a sug- 
gestion for Crowne's use of it.^^^ 

Aside from the satire against the Catholics, the other most 
striking change which Crowne introduced was in the relations be- 
tween Queen Margaret and Suffolk. Early in the play they reveal 
their love for each other.^^* Later, in the midst of the conspiracy 
against Glocester, they discuss Henry's coldness and lack of pas- 
sion.^^^ When Suffolk is banished, his parting with the queen is 
much more tender and personal than it is in Shakespeare.^^^ Finally, 
the queen is more deeply affected by the news of Suffolk's death 
than in the Elizabethan piece. -^^ Crowne's purpose is obviously to 
infuse some slight love element into the plot, which in the original 
is almost barren of romance, and thus to meet the Restoration re- 
quirements for tragedy. The other variations are of a minor nature. 
In Crowne, the conjurer, Humes, reports to the queen and Suffolk 
concerning his meeting with the Duchess of Glocester.^^^ This 
incident does not appear in the Shakespearean piece. In the con- 
juring scene, on the contrary, the part of Southwell is omitted by 
Crowne.^^® In fact the number of minor characters is considerably 
reduced. Among the more important of these lesser figures Somer- 
set is eliminated as a rival of York in the Irish expedition.^^** 
Finally, there are such other minute changes as the omission of 
Salisbury's harangue to the commons, and the showing of Glocester 
dead in his chair by means of a drawn scene. In the Elizabethan 
piece, his body is shown on a bed which is drawn upon the stage.^^^ 

Although Henry the Sixth, the First Part follows its original 
more closely than did The Miseries of Civil-War, as in the earlier 

212 Ibid., IV, 5, pp. 62-3. 

213 Shakespeare, 2 Henry VI, III, 2, lines 368-378. 

214 Crowne, Henry the Sixth, the First Part, II, 3, p. 27. 

215 Ibid., Ill, 2, pp. 32-4. 

216 Ibid., IV, 4, pp. 60-62. 

217 Ibid.. IV, 6, pp. 65-67. 

218 Ibid., I, 3, p. 11. 

219 Ibid., II, 2, pp. 18-9. 

220 Crowne, Henry the Sixth, the First Part, IV, 1, p. 49. 

221 Ibid., IV, 4, pp. 57-59, Cf. Shakespeare, 2 Henry VI, III, 2, lines 151 ff.; 242 ff. 



118 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

play Crowne seldom copies the blank verse of Shakespeare line for 
line; but renders his dialogue in the more elastic Fletcherian 
rhythm.^^^ Here again the percentage of lines with feminine endings 
is relatively very large. 

The criticisms which have been quoted in connection with The 
Miseries of Civil-War were applied by their authors to both parts 
of Crowne's adaptations. Both of the Restoration versions are bad 
enough, but Henry the Sixth, the First part is the poorer of the two. 
In but one respect can it claim any superiority over the Shakes- 
pearean piece. By centering the play completely around the murder 
of the Duke of Glocester, Crowne secured greater unity than was 
possible in the panoramic Elizabethan chronicle history. 

THYESTES 

As early as 1679 Crowne was meditating upon the revolting 
story of Atreus and Thyestes, for in that year he refers to it in 
The Ambitious Statesman. When the Dauphin abrogates his pro- 
mised favors to the Constable, he comments upon the latter's unnat- 
ural willingness to sacrifice his son. Among other things he says, 
"Now thou may'st eat thy son ; the Prince of Day 

Is hardy grown, and will not faint and look 

As girlish as he did at Atreus' feast." 
A moment later the Constable cries, 

'* . . . I am running mad 

With drinking the hot blood of my own young."^^^ 
The tragedy of Thyestes here foreshadowed was produced at the 
Theatre Royal in all likelihood in the season of 1680-81, and per- 
haps even before Henry the Sixth, the First Part was played at the 
Duke's Theatre. Its publication in the Easter term of 1681 points 
to representation in January or February of that year.^^* Unfor- 
tunately, in the case of this play, we have no dedication or prefatory 
epistle to indicate its success or failure.^^^ The editors of the Bio- 
graphia Dram^tica say that it "met with good success" but on what 
authority, I have been unable to ascertain. ^^^ It was printed in 
quarto in 1681. 

222 For purposes of comparison a good example of Crowne's use of the Shakespearean 
play IS found in the first scene of Act III (pp. 27-8), which is drawn from 2 Henry VI, 
II, 2. Here the Restoration author borrows rather closely, but compresses considerably 

223 Works, III, 232-3. 

224 Arber, Term Catalogue, I, 440. 

225 Maidment and Logan in their introduction to Regulus {Works, IV, 125) state 
that that play was the only drama of Crowne which issued from the press without dedica- 
tion or preface. They were mistaken; for neither Thyestes nor The Miseries of Civil-War 
has either dedication or prefatory epistle. 

226 Biographia Dramatica, III, 337. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 119 

The plot of Thyestes may be summarized as follows: Atreus, 
king of Argos, has been deeply wronged by his brother Thyestes, 
who "with bruitsh force" ravished his queen Aerope and iiied the 
court. Atreus, enraged by the act, falsely accuses his wife of con- 
senting to the incest and imprisons her in disgrace. He strives to 
capture Thyestes and avenge the wrong; and when his efforts are 
unsuccessful, he gives himself up wholly to thoughts of revenge 
and loses all his peace of mind. Peneus, an aged philosopher, at- 
tempts to calm the enraged king, but in vain. Meanwhile Philis- 
thenes, son of Thyestes, and Antigone, daughter of Atreus, have 
fallen in love and plan to live in exile together. While Philisthenes 
awaits his sweetheart, who has gone back for a jewel casket which 
she had left behind, he is seized by the guards and taken before the 
king. Atreus suddenly hits upon a plan of revenge, and welcomes 
Philisthenes kindly, learning incidentally from the youth that Peneus 
is in league with Thyestes. Peneus, finding Antigone bewailing the 
absent Philisthenes, hurries to court to rescue him. Atreus feigns 
penitence for his inordinate craving for revenge, and promises Phil- 
isthenes his daughter Antigone if he will induce Thyestes to return 
and be reconciled. Philisthenes appeals to Peneus ; and, although 
he is suspicious at first, when Atreus bids him take the golden ram 
to Thyestes as a gift, he is convinced of the king's good faith and 
goes with Philisthenes to bring Thyestes. 

Aerope is summoned from her bare prison; and is received 
lovingly by Atreus, who orders that she be clothed in rich robes. 
She repeats that she is innocent and there is an apparently happy 
reunion. Meanwhile Thyestes, who has become genuinely repentent, 
is summoned by Philisthenes and Peneus. He is very suspicious 
of his brother's good faith and consents to return to court only 
because the lives of his son and Peneus will be endangered by his 
refusal. Thyestes has many misgivings as he approaches Atreus, 
but they vanish before the profuse displays of friendship on the 
part of his brother. At the queen's request he affirms her innocence, 
but Atreus will have bygones be bygones, and bids them all prepare 
for a festival to celebrate the nuptials of Philisthenes and Antigone. 
After the wedding ceremony Philisthenes is separated from his bride, 
and having been stript and bound by priests, is murdered by Atreus. 
The murderer then invites his brother to the feast at which the 
flesh of Philisthenes is served as meat and his blood as drink. The 
revengeful king reveals his villainy to Thyestes and gloats over the 
grief-stricken man. Antigone, hearing baleful rumors, rushes into 



120 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

her father's presence and reveals the real love between her and 
Thyestes' son; and seeing the dead body of her beloved, kills her- 
self. It is now Thyestes' turn to gloat. Queen Aerope, summoned 
by Atreus to complete his revenge, snatches the dagger from Anti- 
gone's hand, and stabs Thyestes and herself. The aged philosopher 
is accused by Atreus of having wrought this catastrophe, and is 
banished from the court. The king then turns his attention to the 
education of his two sons Agamemnon and Menelaus. 

Crowne's play is manifestly based upon Seneca's tragedy, 
Thyestes ;^^'' but in no sense is it a translation, as some of the com- 
mentators have implied.^^^ It is rather an adaptation of the Latin 
author's work, in the process of which little besides the superstruc- 
ture and plot remains. The English writer's indebtedness to Seneca 
is as follows : Like Seneca he uses Megaera and the ghost of Tan- 
talus to introduce the tragedy, but what in the Latin play occupies 
the entire dialogue of the first act Crowne compresses to serve as a 
dream of Atreus. ^^^ In his attempt to calm Atreus, Peneus corres- 
ponds somewhat to the Guard in the second act of the Latin play.^^" 
One of the few instances in which Crowne preserves the language 
of Seneca is found in the soliloquy of Peneus at the end of Act I. 
This is a free rendering of part of the chorus in Act II of Seneca's 
play.^^^ Again, Atreus' description of the Golden Ram in Act III 
is a free rendering of a similar description in the original. ^^^ In the 
same act the appeal of Philisthenes and Peneus to Thyestes to return 
to Argos owes much to a like scene in Seneca.^^^ Thyestes is suspi- 
cious in both, and in each he comments upon the safety and pleasure 
of a life in exile as opposed to one at court. Part of the same 

227 Two translations of the Thyestes of Seneca appeared in. English before Crowne 
made his adaptation of the play. Jasper Haywood, a son of John Heywood, the interlude 
writer for Henry VIII, made a translation which was published in duodecimo in 1560. 
It was reprinted in a collected edition of Seneca's plays in English in 1581. Heywood's 
translation is in the main faithful. It is written in seven-stress iambic couplets for the 
dialogue, and in iambic pentameter alternate rimes for the chorus. The translator has 
added a final scene in which Thyestes laments his vile crime and mourns the horrid 
consequences of his act. The original quarto is reprinted in an edition by H. De Vocht 
in Band XLI of the Materialen sur Kunde des dlteren englischen Dramen, Louvain, 1913. 
The 1581 edition of the "Tenne Tragedies" of Seneca is reprinted in The Spencer Society 
publications. Another translation was published by John Wright in 1674. It was "writ 
[says the translator] many years since, though corrected, and rendered into somewhat a 
more fashionable garb than its first dress, at the intervals of a more profitable study the 
last long vacation, before it was published." (Halliwell, A Dictionary of Old English 
Plays, 246). Wright also wrote a burlesque, called Mock Thyestes, published with the 
translation in 1674. "Thyestes, instead of returning with his three children, comes back 
with three cats in a bag." (Halliwell, 173). I have not been able to see copies of 
Wright's works. 

228 Maidment and Logan, Works, II, 7. 

229 Seneca, Thyestes, lines 1-121— Crowne, Worki, II, 17-19. 
280 Seneca, Thyestes, Act II — Crowne, Works, II, 24-26. 

231 Seneca, Thyestes, Act II, lines Z9l-AQi— Works, II, 26-7. 

282 Seneca, Thyestes, lines 22S-2ii— Works, II, 38. 

238 Seneca, Thyestes, lines 404-32; AA6-70— Works, II, 53-55. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 121 

passages in Seneca serve also as the source for the remarks of 
Thyestes in the English play when he sees his native Argos again 
and doubts the advisability of returning.^^^ The gloating words 
which Atreus utters as an aside when he has his brother within his 
grasp were suggested by a similar speech of the Atreus of Seneca. 
Likewise the action which immediately follows, — the feigned wel- 
come, removal of filthy apparel, objection to Thyestes' prostrations. 
and offer of a diadem — is all an adaptation from the Latin. ^^^ Again, 
the scene which the messenger reports to the chorus, Crowne drama- 
tizes for action on the stage.^^^ Finally, the banquet scene between 
Atreus and Thyestes in the fifth act is adapted from the last act of 
the Latin play.^^^ In practically all the points of contact, except 
those specifically noted, the similarity is one of superstructure and 
plot rather than of language. 

We have seen that Crowne follows his original in many im- 
portant respects ; on the other hand, his changes are of vital con- 
sequence to the action and general effect. In the first place, he 
reduces the number of Thyestes' sons from three to one. His 
object, no doubt, was to minimize the revolting crime of Atreus, so 
as not to disgust his audience; but another reason for the change 
may be found in the introduction of Antigone as a daughter of 
Atreus, and of the love affair between her and Philisthenes. The 
retention of the other two sons of Thyestes as victims would have 
detracted from the tragic interest in the lovers. The addition of the 
love element also enables Crowne to alter the scheme whereby 
Thyestes is enticed back to Argos. Seneca makes Atreus send his 
sons (Agamemnon and Menelaus) for Thyestes, but Crowne pro- 
vides a more natural method: Philisthenes is promised his liberty 
and the hand of Antigone if he can persuade his father to return. 
Another noteworthy change is the introduction of Aerope as an 
active personage. Whereas in Seneca she does not appear as a 
character but is merely considered as a guilty accomplice of Thyestes, 
in the English play she appears as a tragic example of injured 
innocence, and ends her own wrecked life after she has avenged 
herself on Thyestes. Seneca's tragic theme is the revenge of Atreus 
upon Thyestes and the resultant grief of the latter. To this Crowne 
adds the poignant tragedy of the bHghted hopes of Antigone and 

234 Seneca, Thyestes, lines 404-32— Works, II, 55-57. 

235 Seneca, Thyestes, lines 491-545 — Works, II, 57-59. 

236 Seneca, Thyestes, Act IW— Works, II, 62-68. 

237 Seneca, Thyestes, lines 970 ii.— Works, II, 69-74. 



122 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Philisthenes, and the pitiful story of Aerope. Yet another addition 
is the old philosopher Peneus, who serves as a go-between for the 
two brothers. He is not wholly new, since he performs some of the 
functions of the chorus; and indeed Crowne may be said to have 
drafted him from among the old men of Mycenae. 

For most of Crowne's additions and changes no source need be 
sought, but this is not true of the character of Antigone. The taste 
of Crowne's time demanded a "love-interest" in tragedy, and this 
he has undertaken to supply in the story of Antigone and Philis- 
thenes. For this we may feel confident that he had recourse to the 
Antigone of Sophocles. The story of Philisthenes and Antigone is 
in many respects a reversal of that of Haemon and Antigone in 
Sophocles. Philisthenes like Antigone in the Greek drama is con- 
demned to die by the father of his beloved, while Crowne's Antigone 
like the Greek Haemon takes her own life, thereby causing sorrow 
to the offending father. Moreover, the manner in which Crowne 
ends his tragedy may owe something to Sophocles. Eurydice kills 
herself upon hearing how her husband Creon has caused the death 
of her son. In a somewhat similar fashion Aerope kills herself 
after she has slain Thyestes, blaming him for all her woe — loss of 
daughter, of fame, and of her husband's love. 

Concerning the theme of Thyestes Genest remarks that *'a 
stranger subject was surely never chosen for a modern play."^^® 
Yet Crowne's adaptation is not the only English drama in which 
human flesh is served up at a banquet. Shakespeare in his younger 
days did not hesitate to retain such a scene in his revision of the old 
play (or plays) on the subject of Titus Andronicus.^^^ Crowne has, 
in the words of Genest, "managed the story much better than could 
have been suspected, and vastly better than Seneca."^*° He softens 
the horror of the banquet scene and introduces a greater degree of 
human interest in Philisthenes by providing him with an attachment 
for Antigone. The crime of Thyestes is heightened by the intro- 
duction of an innocent Aerope, whose presence adds considerably 
to the emotional effectiveness of the piece. On the other hand, one 
is inclined to agree with Genest^*^ again that the playwright was 
unfortunate in retaining the ghost of Tantalus and Megaera, and in 
bringing the golden ram upon the stage. Much more blameworthy, 
however, is the introduction of an indecent song of several stanzas 

238 Genest, I, 292. 

239 Titus Andronicus, V, 3. 

240 Genest, I, 292. 

241 Ibid., I, 293. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 123 

in length at the moment before Thyestes unconsciously eats of the 
flesh and drinks of the blood of his own son : 
"A lovely pair endowed by fate, 

With love's and beauty's whole estate ; 

At the sweetest game have been, 

You know, you know what I mean, 

You know, you know what I mean."^*^ 
The monstrous lack of decorum here is too patent to demand com- 
ment. 

CITY POLITIQUES 

A determination of the date of Crowne's next play. City Poli- 
tiques, is of some importance, since it has been erroneously given 
as 1675 for over a century, Egerton in 1788 listed quartos of this 
comedy under date of 1675, 1683, 1688, and 1693.=^*^ In the first 
date, 1675, he was certainly mistaken, as I shall presently show. I 
have been unable to trace a quarto of 1693 and indeed it is unlikely 
that one existed. Quartos of The Countrey Wit were published 
in 1675 and 1693, and Egerton undoubtedly transferred those dates 
to the City Politiques. In any case Egerton's error was studiously 
copied by the editors of the Biographic Dramatica, by Halliwell, and 
by Maidment and Logan.^** Several facts make the 1675 date abso- 
lutely impossible. In the first place, City Politiques contains a great 
many references to events which took place during the years of the 
Popish Plot agitation and as late as 1682. Dryden's two political 
satires, Ahsolom and Achitophel and The Medal, published in the 
fall of 1681 and the spring of 1682, are mentioned by name.^*** 
In the same connection two poems by Samuel Pordage, Azariah and 
Hushai and The Medal Reversed, both published in the spring of 
1682, are spoken of as composed by Craffy to answer these satires 
of Dryden.^*^ There are references to the Ignoramus juries of the 
time, such as that which acquitted Shaftesbury on November 24, 
1681, and to the paper of association which was found among 
Shaftesbury's possessions when he was arrested in July of the same 

242 Works, II, 14-15, 69. 

243 Egerton, Theatrical Remembrances, p. 94. 

2^4: Biographia Dramatica, I, pt. I, 158 and II, 105; Halliwell, Diet, of Old English 
Plays, 50; Maidment and Logan, Works, II, 83 were aware of the inaccuracy of the 1675 
date, yet they retained it in vol. I, p. xv. They mistakenly supposed the 1688 quarto 
to be the earliest. That the mistake originated with Egerton seems likdy in view of the 
fact that Langbaine, p. 93, records only a 1683 quarto, and that Robert Dodsley (^Theatrical 
Records, p. Ti) in 1756 gives only this. 

245 Works, II, 125. 

246 Works, II, 168-69. 



124 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

year. In fact, the whole significance of the play is its political satire 
upon the Whigs of the 1681-82 period. 

In the second place, Crowne states in his preface that the 
peculiar jargon which Bartoline is made to speak was his own in- 
vention, and was taught by him to "Mr. Lee," who played the part.^*^ 
Anthony Leigh was a member of the Duke of York's company from 
about 1672 to 1682, when the union of the two dramatic companies 
took place. The united companies opened at the Theatre Royal on 
November 16, 1682;^*^ hence Leigh could not have played in City 
Politiques before that time, since we know from the title page of the 
1683 quarto that it was performed by his Majesty's servants. Ac- 
cording to one account Leigh did not go to the Theatre Royal im- 
mediately after the union.^*^ Thus City Politiques could not have 
been completed in the form in which we have it before the end of 
March, 1682 ; and it could not have been acted until after the union 
of the two companies in November of that year, and until Leigh 
had joined his Majesty's servants. 

Crowne's comedy may well have been finished by the end 
of the summer of 1682, for there were considerable difficulties to be 
overcome before a political play could see the light of the theatre. 
Each play had to pass through the hands of Henry Bennet, Lord 
Arlington, the Lord Chamberlain. In the case of Dryden and Lee's 
political tragedy. The Duke of Guise, a delay of nearly six months 
resulted. This play was in the Lord Chamberlain's hands before 
midsummer, 1682, but orders were not finally given for its represen- 
tation until December of that year. It was acted on December 4th, 
and was among the first plays to be produced by the united com- 
pany.^^° In a similar manner City Politiques was delayed. Dennis 
says of Crowne and his play that "after he had writ it, he met 
with very great Difficulties in the getting it acted. Bennet Lord 
Arlington, who was then Lord Chamberlain of the King's House- 
hold, and who had secretly espous'd the Whigs who were at that 
time powerful in Parliament . . . used all his Authority to 
suppress it. One while it was prohibited on the account of its being 
Dangerous, another while it was laid aside on the pretence of its 
being Flat and Insipid; till Mr. Crowne at last was forc'd to have 
recourse to the King himself, and to engage him to give his Abso- 
lute Command to the Lord Chamberlain for the Acting of it ; which 

247 Works, II, 97. 

248 Genest, I, 392. 

2*9 Diet. Nat. Biog., XI, 869-70. 

250 The Works of John Dryden, ed. Scott and Saintsbury, VII, 7, 10. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 125 

Command the King was pleased to give in his own Person."^^^ 
In view of the considerable delay here implied, we must conclude 
that the play was not acted before a date late in December 1682 and 
more probably not until January or February of 1683. It was 
originally published in the spring of 1683.^^^ A second edition came 
out in 1688. 

The production of City Politiques undoubtedly caused some- 
thing of a sensation, but it must have had considerable success as 
well ; for the author in his preface speaks of "flourishing the colours 
after victory." Langbaine remarks in parenthesis that he saw it 
acted with applause.^^^ It was revived at Lincoln's-Inn-Fields on 
August 14, 1705, when the play-bill states that it had not been acted 
for twenty years ; but the same theatre played it again on September 
2nd and announced that this performance was the fourth in twenty 
years.^^* It was revived again by the summer company at Drury 
Lane on July 11, 1712, and finally at Lincoln's-Inn-Fields on July 
10, 1717.^^^ It may perhaps be considered as remarkable that a play 
so strongly anti-Whig should have been played at all during the 
period following the revolution of 1688. 

The plot of City Politiques is as follows : Paulo Camillo, leader 
of the Whig party, has been elected Podesta of Naples to the dis- 
appointment of the Viceroy and the governor of the city. He has 
been assisted to the office by Dr. Panchy and the Bricklayer, two 
of his imperious upstart associates, who propose to do all things 
according to law. Of the same party is Florio, a debauchee, who 
in order to intrigue with Rosaura, the Podesta's young, beautiful, 
and wanton wife, feigns penance for his past sins and infirmities, 
which mark him for an early death. In his pursuit of Rosaura, 
Florio learns that Craffy, the Podesta's son, is in love with her, 
and is seeking an opportunity to lie with her. The Podesta en- 
courages his wife to be kind to Florio, in the hope that he will leave 
her his estate. Thus Florio is left in Rosaura's company. Their 
first eager embrace is interrupted by the Podesta, but the quick- 
witted wife bids Florio pretend to faint in her arms. Meanwhile 
Bartoline, an old, toothless lawyer brings his young wife Lucinda 
to lodge at the Podesta's, and learning of Florio's probable legacy, 

251 Dennis, Original Letters, I, 49-50. 

252 Arber, Term Catalogue, 11, 17. There are copies of both the 1683 and the 1688 
quartos in the Harvard College Library. 

253 Langbaine, 93. 

254 Genest, II, 333, 342. 

255 Ibid., II, 500, 612. 



126 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

bids his wife win Florio's favor. Artall, a Tory, who has fathomed 
the debauchee's pretense seizes the opportunity to disguise himself 
as the infirm Florio, and to get access to Lucinda. She falls a will- 
ing victim, while her husband Bartoline is bargaining with the poli- 
tical parties for his services. 

The intriguing Florio, balked in his first effort to enjoy Rosaura, 
attempts to clear the field by bringing news of the arrival of a 
French fleet whose commanders lurk disguised near Mt. Vesuvio 
ready to burn the city. The Podesta, convinced of the honesty of 
his wife and Florio, leaves them and goes with his followers to 
hunt out the French enemy. As Florio and Rosaura are about to 
seize their opportunity, Craffy knocks. Florio is hastily disguised 
as Camillo asleep on the couch. The intoxicated Craify reveals his 
lewd intentions to Rosaura, and she is saved only by the opportune- 
ness of the Podesta's return. Her quick wit directs Craffy to attack 
his father as a murderer, and before the identity of the disguised 
Podesta is revealed, Florio makes his escape. During this time 
Camillo and his party show little sympathy for the people who 
elected them, and Craffy has been engaged on poems in reply to 
Absalom and Achitophel and The Medal whenever he has not been 
thinking of his step-mother. At length Florio makes another attempt 
to be alone with Rosaura, by bringing word and forged evidence of a 
plot against the Whigs. He is successful and leads Rosaura away to 
enjoy her favors. Craffy, returning a little in advance of his father, 
sees Florio and Rosaura together in an adjoining room. He taunts 
Camillo with being a cuckold, but is prevented by the Bricklayer 
and the Podesta from opening the door. His accusation is con- 
founded by the arrival of Bartoline, who reports that Florio is ill 
upon his wife's bed. Florio and Rosaura thus escape from their 
predicament, and the latter returns to her chamber. Craffy is con- 
sidered as mad. 

In the meantime Bartoline discovers Artall and Lucinda kiss- 
ing, and the couple openly defy him. Since Craffy's accusation is 
proved apparently false, he is locked up. Through another trick 
of Florio the Podesta is led by Pietro, Florio's servant, who is 
disguised as a Spaniard, to another part of his own house which he 
is told is the court of the Viceroy. Here he is to be appointed Lord 
Treasurer. Unfortunately Craffy breaks from his confinement into 
this very room only to find his father, whom he considers mad when 
the latter talks of court. Through the accusation of Craffy and the 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 127 

interference of the governor, Florio and Rosaura are discovered 
together, but are openly defiant. BartoHne, mistaking Florio for 
Artall disguised, accuses him by suborning an Irishman to inform 
against him, but the witness is confounded by the appearance of 
Artall. The Irish knave confesses. Artall explains that Lucinda is 
his cousin, and the governor of the city revokes the Podesta's power 
in order to put an end to his negative influence. 

Historically considered. City Politiques belongs to an extremely 
interesting period, which produced in the short space of less than 
four years the so-called Popish Plot, the rapid development of poli- 
tical parties, the Exclusion bill, and the fall of Shaftesbury. More- 
over, it is one of a group of political plays brought forward under 
the influence of the Whigs and Tories in which the leaders and 
actions of the two parties are made the butt of witty and often very 
scurrilous satire. For the Whig cause Elkanah Settle wrote Pope 
Joan, or The Female Prelate (1680) and Thomas Shadwell, his 
Lancashire Witches and Tegue O'Divelly, the Irish Priest (1681). 
Both were satires against the Papists, but both were political in 
motive as well. On the Tory side the playwrights were even more 
active. Thomas D'Urfey wrote Sir Barnahy Whigg (1681) and 
The Royalist (1682). He was followed by Mrs. Aphra Behn with 
The City Heiress, acted towards the close of 1681. Otway's Venice 
Preserved (1682) concealed English conditions under a foreign set- 
ting. In the same year 1682, Thomas Southerne's first tragedy, 
The Loyal Brother, had a similar purpose. And finally, belonging 
to the same class, there was The Duke of Guise (1682) by Dryden 
and Lee, already referred to. In all of these Tory plays Shaftes- 
bury is satirized in some form or other.^^^ 

Into this warfare of the playwrights Crowne plunged in his 
City Politiques, a bitter satire on the whole Whig party, and the 
most completely political of the entire group. ^^^ "They who do not 
like the plot," says the author, ''must blame the faction who invented 
the original, for mine's but a copy."^^* Under the thin disguise of 
a Neapolitan setting, he portrays persons and events of the time. 
Lord Shaftesbury, Titus Oates, Stephen Colledge and Serjeant May- 
nard, have been suggested as the originals of the Podesta, Dr. 
Panchy, the Bricklayer, and Bartoline, and in the first three cases 
the identification is probably correct. As to Bartoline, however, 

256 Rose A. Wright, The Political Play of the Restoration, pp. 105-120, 129-132, 
147-156. Cf. also Southern e, The Loyal Brother, edited by P. Hamdius, Introduction. 
267 Wright, p. 121. 
258 Works, II, 100. 



128 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

there has been considerable uncertainty and an equal amount of 
discussion. In his preface to the reader Crowne denies any inten- 
tion of impersonation. "That I never designed," he says, "to per- 
sonate any one appears, because I have not done it, for I who have 
drawn the general corruption of lawyers so well as to please con- 
siderable judges, indeed the whole town, cou'd with as much ease 
have pictur'd any man's particular qualities, which I would not 
hear of, though some would have enticed me to it."^^^ A careful 
study of the play, however, in connection with the poHtical history 
of the time, leads me to the conclusion that Crowne's denial is more 
or less of a quibble. In no case, perhaps, did he transfer many 
of the personal traits of any individual to one of his characters, 
but in several cases traits enough are presented for identification. 
Without doubt the Bricklayer was intended to represent Stephen 
Colledge, the Protestant Joiner. According to the view of a Tory 
historian, Colledge was "a pragmatical Man, and a Fanatic," who 
"was set up as a prime Operator in the desperate Doings of the 
Party . . . His Province lay in managing Sedition and Treason 
among a lower Order of Men."^®° Bishop Echard contributes a 
similar account, adding that Colledge was "of a sawcy Behavior 
with respect to his Superiors, and would take the Liberty both to 
sing and talk any Thing against the King and his best Friends. "^^^ 
In March, 1681 he went to Oxford while Parliament was in session 
there, and spoke threateningly against the king and advocated re- 
sistance. He was arrested in June and committed to the Tower, 
but was released by an Ignoramus jury. He was then tried at 
Oxford and executed August 31, 1681. On one occasion in the play 
the following dialogue occurs between the governor and the Brick- 
layer : 

"Go. What are you, sir . . . ? 
Br. 'Tis well known what I am. I am a free- 
man of Naples, a bricklayer by trade. 
Go. Oh, I have heard of a busy, pragmatical fellow 
that calls himself the Catholic bricklayer. Are 
you he, sir?"262 

The expression 'freeman of Naples' seems to be an echo of the 
Oxford trial of Colledge, who claimed that as a freeman of London 

259 Works, II, 96. 

260 Roger North, Examen, London, 1740, p. 585. 

261 Laurence Echard, A History of England, 3rd edition, 1720, p. 1011. 

262 Works, II, 116. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 129 

he should be tried there. The term 'Catholic bricklayer' is an ironi- 
cal variation of Protestant Joiner. Moreover the Bricklayer is 
pragmatical like the historical Colledge of North's and Echard's 
descriptions. His insistence on doing things according to the law 
is doubtless intended to convey this idea. On one occasion the 
Bricklayer replies to a taunt by Craify that he can make better verses 
than the latter.^*^^ This may be an allusion to Colledge's ballad- 
singing. In the fifth act Craify says to Dr. Panchy : 

"V the University of Coffee-houses, the University 
of Lies . . . There thou'rt a doctor, and the 
bricklayer principal fellow of a college."^^* 
This is a manifest pun on Colledge's name. In addition to this 
incidental evidence, the Bricklayer occupies a position in the Podes- 
ta's council similar to that which Colledge held with Shaftesbury. 
It is equally certain that Dr. Panchy was drawn as a caricature 
of Titus Oates, notorious as the great perjurer and as chief instiga- 
tor of the so-called Popish Plot. All of the evidence points in that 
direction. Florio says of Dr. Panchy : 

"He is a zealous man, and so seldom calls any man 

by his christen name, that he is suspected to be an 

Anabaptist and against christening . . . "^^^ 

Granger says of Oates that "he was successively an Anabaptist, a 

Conformist, and a Papist."^*^*^ On another occasion Florio asks 

Panchy to offer prayer, and Panchy, after some quibbling consents. 

"I'll do it out o' matter of honour, and matter of 

revenge ; the priests are rascals and slight me, and 

I'll slight their prayers."^®^ 

Oates professed Catholicism in 1677 and was sent successively to 

Jesuit colleges at ValladoHd and St. Omer, but was dismissed from 

both institutions. Returning to England, he presented evidence of a 

Jesuit plot, and directly or indirectly succeeded in getting a large 

number of Catholics hanged. This phase of his career is expressed 

in Dr. Panchy's desire to see all the rogues hanged who appeared 

against the Podesta at the election, his crying a horrible plot when 

Florio is accused in the last act, and his willingness to swear to any- 

263 Works. II. 180. 

264 Works, II, 191-2. 

265 Works, II, 127. 

265 J. Granger, A Biographical History of England, 5th edition, London, 1824, VI, 5. 
267 Works. II, 129. 



130 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

thing.^^® In a quarrel with the Podesta about precedence, Dr. Panchy 
says, 

"Go bid the Archbishop of Naples come to me! 
I'll make his fortunes." 
The Podesta replies, 

*'He means, bid the Archbishopric of Naples come 
to him; but it won't come, doctor."^^^ 
This seems to be a reference to the fact that in the heyday of his 
popularity as a "savior of his country" Oates donned episcopal garb 
except for the lawn sleeves. The Archbishop of Canterbury recom- 
mended him for promotion in the church, and Shaftesbury encour- 
aged him to expect a bishopric.^^° Like Oates, Dr. Panchy is given 
to calling people rogues and rascals. Craffy says to him, 
"Nay, if rogue and rascal be Latin and Greek, thou 
art the best scholar in Christendom, for no man 
living is so verst in those languages."^^^ 
Incidentally it is Craffy, who in baiting Dr. Panchy, gives us the 
surest proof that Titus Oates was intended. After Craffy has pro- 
voked Panchy, the following dialogue takes place : 
"Dr. Sirrah, I'll hang you! 
Craf. Ay, thou art a doctor at that. 
Dr. Ay, and of divinity too, you impudent rascal ! 
Craf. Where did you take your degree — in Bear- 
garden ? 

Dr. In a learned university, sir. 
Craf. V the University of Coffee-houses, the Uni- 
versity of Lies, where if any one speaks truth, the 
University forfeits its charter . . . "^^^ 
This passage contains an unmistakable allusion to the sham degree 
which Oates claimed he had received at Salamanca,^^^ as well as 
a reference to the hangings effected by his evidence. 

The Podesta is to be identified with the Earl of Shaftesbury, 
but only in a general way, as the leader of a political party having 
such men in his service as Titus Oates and Stephen Colledge. It 
was sufficient from Crowne's point of view as a Tory satirist that 
he should paint the Whig leader as a cuckold, the ridiculous victim 

268 Works, II, 206, 208. 

269 Works, II, 174. 

270 Diet. Nat. Biog., XIV, 745. 

271 Works, II, 191. 

272 John Pollock, The Popish Plot, p. 8. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 131 

of Florio*s plots. In this he was following unworthily in the foot- 
steps of Otway and others.^^^ In Craffy, the son of the Podesta, 
there is the hint of a sneer at Shaftesbury's only son and heir. 
Dry den in Absalom and Achitophel spoke of him as 

"... that unf eathered two-legged thing, a son ; 

Got while his soul did huddled notions try ; 

And born a shapeless lump, like Anarchy." 
In his comments on this passage, Scott says of the second Lord 
Shaftesbury: "He was of a very insignificant character, at least 
not at all distinguished by mental abilities . . . His want of 
capacity was a standing joke among the Tories. "^^* Craffy in his 
infatuation for his step-mother appears very stupid at times, and is 
finally considered as mad by his father. On the other hand, Craffy 
is the poet of his party, and replies to Absalom and Achitophel and 
The Medal with two poems, Azariah and Hushai and The Medal 
Reversed. Samuel Pordage, an obscure dramatist, was the author of 
both of these works, and might well be considered the original of the 
caricature. Other Whig poets, however, replied to Dryden's satires. 
Elkanah Settle wrote Absalom Senior, or Achitophel Transposed 
and Thomas Shadwell, The Medal of John Bayes in the spring 
of 1682, and the latter published The Tory Poets, A Satyr on Sep- 
tember 4, 1682.^^^ It is likely, therefore, that Crowne's Craffy was 
intended to ridicule the whole group — Settle, Shadwell, Pordage, 
and other Whig scribblers who replied to Dryden's satires. 

There is more uncertainty concerning the identification of the 
old lawyer, Bartoline. Langbaine in 1691 wrote that Crowne was 
accused of abusing "an Eminent Serjeant at Law and his Wife," 
and the author himself in his preface remarks, " 'Tis said I openly 
confest who I meant by the principal characters in the Play, par- 
ticularly by that of Bartoline. That this is false, common sense 
and the character itself will prove." Later in the preface he con- 
tinues, "That I have made my lawyer old and married to a young 
wife, is of no more concernment to any gentleman in those circum- 
stances than the description of a thief in the Gazette, by his wig 
and coat, is to an honest man directly so habited."^^^ Crowne's 
Bartoline is thus described by the Podesta: — "The old lawyer is a 
strange fellow; he is very old and very rich, and yet follows the 

273 See The Works of Aphra Behn, edited by M. Summers, II, 198, for a list of 
plays in which Shaftesbury is satirized. 

274 The Works of Dryden, Scott and Saintsbury, IX, 239-40. 

275 The Prose Works of Dryden, Malone, I, pt. I, 165, 

276 Works, II, 96. 



132 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

term, as if he were to begin the world."^" These statements all 
point to Sir John Maynard, the distinguished serjeant-at-law, who 
in 1682, although he was eighty years old, was still in active prac- 
tice. Moreover, Bartoline is married to "a. young garle." May- 
nard was married four times, his fourth wife being Mary Upton, 
relict of Sir Charles Vermuyden. If, as is likely, she was his wife 
in 1682, the discrepancy in their ages would have been noticeable, 
for she was about thirty-two while he was eighty .^^^ There are 
other reasons also for supposing that Serjeant Maynard was in- 
tended. His long career shows some devious turnings and shifts 
of allegiance which might well have been satirized. He was ap- 
pointed Protector's serjeant in 1658, but in 1660 he became King's 
Serjeant and was knighted. On constitutional questions he steered 
a wary and somewhat ambiguous course. He was active in the 
prosecutions arising out of the Popish Plot, and thus had been 
before the public just previous to the appearance of Crowne's play. 
Like Bartoline he had amassed a large f ortune.^^^ Maynard was no 
worse than the other lawyers of his time, but Roger North has pre- 
served an anecdote concerning him which parallels the action of 
Bartoline. Maynard had brought action against a man for scan- 
dalous words. A witness of the trial reported that a client came 
to the Serjeant with a basket of pippins, each with a gold piece in 
it. The other side thereupon gave him a roasting pig stuffed with 
fifty broad pieces. The Bartoline of the play is very mercenary and 
sells his services at the same time to the party of the Podesta and to 
the governor's faction. He accepts all their money and plans to 
serve the highest bidder.^^^ Maidment and Logan suggested Aaron 
Smith as a more likely original of Bartoline than Maynard. ^^^ Smith 
was an unscrupulous lawyer engaged in treasonable plots, and one 
who interested himself in the cases of Colledge and Oates ; but I am 
inclined to agree with Mrs. Wright that the evidence is strongly 
in favor of Maynard.^^^ Although Crowne's statement that he in- 
tended to satirize lawyers in general probably has some truth in 
it, there is almost the hint of an apology to Maynard and his wife 

277 Works, II, 133. 

278 On December 20, 1667 Mary Upton was about seventeen when she married Sir 
Charles Vermuyden. See J, L. Chester, London Marriage Licenses, London, 1887, col. 
1385. In a copy of the 1688 quarto of City Politiques in the Harvard Library opposite 
the characters of Bartoline and Lucinda in the dramatis personae are written the abbrevia- 
tions "Serj. M:" and "Serj. M: yo: wife." The handwriting seems to be of the late 
seventeenth century. 

270 Roger North, Lives of the Norths, I, 235-6. 

280 JVorks, II, 145, 147-8, 164-5. 

281 Works, II, 85-86. 

282 Wright, 125-127. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 133 

in his words, "I had a more honourable opinion of those who are 
said to be personated than to suspect that anyone wou'd apprehend 
them by two such lewd characters as Bartoline and Lucinda."^®^ 

M. Beljame, in referring to Bartoline, has stated that Crowne 
reproduces the pronunciation of Maynard,^^* but I find no evidence 
that such was the case, except the author's denial. "Nor is any 
man," he says, "more than another mimiqued by Mr. Lee's way of 
speaking, which all the comedians can witness was my own inven- 
tion, and Mr. Lee was taught it by me." He then explains that the 
toothless Bartoline is unable to pronounce his dentals, but that 
for th he sounds a. y; for t, a ch (as in church) ; and for s, an sh.^^° 
The aged Maynard may have had some defects of articulation, but 
it is likely that this extreme representation of peculiarities of speech 
was suggested to Crowne as a means of making his old lawyer 
ridiculous by the successful presentation of Tegue O'Divelly's Irish 
brogue by Anthony Leigh in Shadwell's Lancashire Witches (1681). 
Crowne would scarcely have had the audacity to deny the identity 
of his caricature of Maynard if he had really imitated his speech 
closely. 

Crowne's satire against the Whigs was not limited entirely to 
the ridicule of figures prominent in the party. In one noteworthy 
instance he parodied a Whig document and turned it against its 
originators. When Shaftesbury was committed to the Tower in 
July 1681, his papers were seized and among them was found the 
"Paper of Association," containing a proposal to form an associa- 
tion for the defense of the protestant faith against the accession of 
a popish king. In his play Crowne makes Dr. Panchy report that 
the Tories have discovered the "Paper of Association," and drawn 
up an imitation, which he reads. This reproduces a considerable 
part of the original document, and alters only those parts which 
it is necessary to change for the purpose of satire, as a comparison 
of the two will show. 

Shaftesbury's Paper Crowne's Parody 

We the Knights, &c. finding to We, the loyal, &c., finding to the 
the Grief of our Hearts, the grief of our hearts a certain sort 
Popish Priests and Jesuits, and of people, consisting of Hobbists, 
their Adherents and Abettors, Atheists, Fanaticks, and Repub- 
have for several Years last past licans, have for several years last 

283 Works, II, 96. 

284 A. Beljame, Le Public et les Hommes de Lettres en Angleterre au Dix-huitieme 
Steele, p. 155. 

285 Works, II, 97. 



134 



WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 



pursu'd a most, pernicious and 
hellish Plot, to root out the true 
Protestant Religion as a pestilent 
heresy, to take away the life of 
our Gracious King, to subvert 
our Laws and Liberties, and to 
set up Arbitrary Power and 
Popery 

2. And it being notorious that 
they have been highly encourag'd 
by the Countenance and Protec- 
tion given and procured for them 
by James Duke of York, and by 
their Expectation of his Succeed- 
ing to the Crown ... 4. And 
that the said Duke, in order to 
reduce all into his own Power, 
hath procured the Garrisons, the 
Army, and Ammunition, and all 
the Power of the Seas and Sol- 
diery .... 

5. And as We, considering with 
heavy Hearts, how greatly the 
Strength, Reputation, and Treas- 
ure of the Kingdom both at sea 
and land is Wasted and Con- 
sumed, and lost by the intricate 
expensive Management of those 
wicked destructive designs; and 
finding the same Counsels, after 
exemplary Justice upon some of 
the Conspirators, to be still pur- 
sued with the utmost Devilish 
Malice, and Desire for Revenge 
whereby his Majesty is in a con- 
tinual Hazard of being murder'd 
to make way for the said Duke's 
Advancement to the Crown, and 
the whole Kingdom, in such case 
is destitute of all Security of 
their Religion, Laws, Estates, 
and Liberty; sad Experience in 
the Case, Queen Mary, having 
prov'd the wisest Laws to be of 
little Force to keep out Popery 
and Tyranny under a Popish 
prince. 



past pursued a pernicious plot, 
to root out the true religion, sub- 
vert our laws and liberties, and 
set up arbitrary power. 

And it being notorious that they 
have been highly encouraged by 
the countenance and protection 
given 'em by the rabble, and by 
their expectation of the said rab- 
ble coming to the government, it 
appears also to us, that for these 
designs ignoramus garrisons have 
been established among us, by 
whose assistance these men have 
laid a blockade before the Crown 
itself, denying it all relief, unless 
'twill own itself a dependence 
upon them. And we considering, 
with heavy hearts, how greatly 
the reputation and honesty of the 
kingdom hath been wasted in 
maintaining the said garrison; 
and finding the same counsels, 
after exemplary justice upon 
some of the conspirators, to be 
still pursued with the utmost 
devilish malice and desire of re- 
venge, whereby his Majesty is 
in continual hazard to be de- 
stroyed, to make way for the said 
rabble's advancement to the 
crown. 

The whole kingdom, in such case 
being destitute of all security of 
their religion, laws, estates, and 
liberties : sad experience in the 
case, the Rump Committee of 
Safety, Noll and Dick in Eng- 
land, and Massaniello here, hav- 
ing proved the wisest laws to be 
of little force to keep out tyran- 
ny under no prince, or no lawful 
prince. 

We have, therefore, several times 
endeavoured in a legal way, by 
indictments, to bring the said 
criminals to condign punishment ; 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 135 

6. We have therefore endeav- but being utterly rejected and 
oured in a Parliamentary-way by brought almost to despair, we 
a Bill for the Purpose to Bar and bind ourselves one to another, 
Exclude the said Duke from the jointly and severally, in the bond 
Succession to the Crown, and to of one firm and loyal society and 
Banish him forever out of these association: and do solemnly 
Kingdoms of England and Ire- vow, promise, and protest to de- 
land. But the first Means of the moHsh the said ignoramus gar- 
King and Kingdom's Safety be- risons, which are kept up in and 
ing utterly rejected, and we left about this city, to the great ter- 
almost in Despair . . . We ror, and amazement of all the 
have thought fit to propose to all good people in the land. And 
true Protestants an Union among utterly destroy all that shall seek 
themselves .... to set up the said rabble's pre- 

T- „-. . ,, 1 • 1 T-. tended title, or shall raise any 

In Witness of all which Pre- ^,^^^ tumult, or sedition in his 
mises . -we . put ^^^^^^ ^^ ^ his command, as 

our Hands and Seals and shall j-eiigion, and country; and this 
be most ready to accept and ^^j^^ ^^emies to our laws, king, 
admit any others hereafter into ^^ ^^^^^ ^f being esteemed 
this Society and Association.^«« ^^^^ ourselves. Witness our 

hands. ^^^ 
Grosse^^^ has attempted to show that Crowne got his stimulus 
for writing City Politiqiies from Sir P olitick-W ould-B e , a comedy 
a la maniere des Anglois^^^ written by St. Evremond with the assist- 
ance of the Duke of Buckingham and M. d'Aubigny in 1662.^^° 
He admits that the general drift of the two plays is different, but 
he finds some parallels in characters and plot. Sir Politick, he says 
in the first place, finds a helper for his intrigue in Riche-Source, 
just as the Podesta does in Dr. Panchy and the Bricklayer. But 
there is no real similarity here. Sir Politick and Riche-Source dis- 
cuss some fanciful notions which each has, but they do not get much 
farther. The Podesta is in power and aims at higher honors. Dr. 
Panchy and the Bricklayer, far from being reminiscent of Riche- 
Source, are drawn from men who assisted Shaftesbury in his in- 
trigues. Secondly, Grosse sees a parallel between the two plots, 
but there is little similarity between the projects of Sir Politick and 
M. Riche-Source and the efforts of the Podesta and his party to 
consolidate their power. The plot of Crowne's play, moreover, is 
based, as the author states, upon the actions of the Whig party at 

286 Echard, The History of England, 3rd edition, p. 1014-15. 

287 Works, II, 171-3. 

288 Grosse, 36-7. 

289 Oeuvres de ... 5"*. Evremond, Paris, 1740, II, 175-318. 

290 For the date see The Works of St. Evremond, made English by Des Maizeaux, 
London, 1728, I, xli. 



186 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

the time of the Exclusion Bill. Finally, Grosse points out that 
Bartoline, like Tancrede in Sir P olitick-W oiild-B e , gives council to 
both parties. Although this similarity is apparent, the parallel goes 
no farther. On the other hand, Crowne himself tells us that Bar- 
toline is a satire upon the corruption of lawyers, who were much in 
the public eye during the numerous trials growing out of the Popish 
Plot. St. Evremond's play, moreover, belongs to the period of 
1662, twenty years before Crowne's production, and it is idle to 
speculate as to whether the EngHsh playwright was familiar with 
it or not. Even if he were, there is no reason to believe that it 
served to suggest his political play in 1682. As we have seen above, 
Crowne's incentive came from the political strife of his own day, 
and he had many examples of similar work from the pens of his 
contemporaries. 

Although Crowne drew the greater part of his material from 
the political situation in the years 1678 to 1682, he was indebted to 
previous EngHsh comedies for the ideas which he developed in the 
parts of Florio, Rosaura, Artall, and Lucinda. The role of Florio 
is a variation on that of Horner in Wycherley's Country Wife. 
Horner has it spread about town that he is impotent as a result of 
venereal disease and the operation necessary to cure it; otherwise 
he is in good health, and he professes an aversion for women. His 
purpose is to make himself free of the ladies and to disarm the 
suspicion of their husbands. Florio, to ''blear the eye" of Rosaura's 
husband pretends that his licentiousness has resulted in a mortal 
malady, and that he has reformed and feels a dislike for the other 
sex. The freedom which Sir Jasper Fidget allows his wife with 
Horner seems to be imitated in the attitude of the Podesta towards 
Florio and Rosaura, and Mrs. Pinchwife is certainly the model for 
Bartoline's Lucinda, "a young garle" from the country,^®^ who enters 
into an intrigue with the disguised Artall with the same zest which 
Mrs. Pinchwife shows in her affair with Horner. Besides these 
character borrowings, Crowne seems to have utilized at least one 
incident from Wycherley's play. In The Country Wife Sir Jasper 
prevents Mrs. Squeamish from breaking into the room where Horner 
is enjoying Lady Fidget, for Horner, he says, will do her no harm. 
Similarly in City Politiques, after Craffy has seen Florio and Ros- 
aura together, the Bricklayer and the Podesta hinder him from 
breaking open the chamber door.^®^ 

291 Works. II, 133. 

292 Wycherley, The Country Wife, Mermaid Series. Act IV, sc. 3, p. 22A — Works, 
II, 179-181. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 137 

Although Florio owes his existence primarily to Horner, he is 
somewhat indebted to Ben Jonson's Volpone. Like Voloone, he 
feigns a mortal malady. Volpone dons a cap, has his face covered 
with oils and patches, and lies on a couch.^^^ Similarly Florio 
appears with a patch on his nose, with a pillow, and all the equipage 
of a sick room. Volpone's dupes are greedy for his estate. In a 
like manner the Podesta allows Rosaura to be friendly with Florio 
in the hope that she may inherit a great part of his property,^^* and 
Bartoline likewise bids Lucinda "get incho yish genklemansh favour 
by your shobriechy, and you may mump my Lady Poshta of hish 
eschate for oughtch I know."^^^ As Volpone, with the assistance 
of Mosca, plays a series of tricks upon his victims, Florio imposes 
upon the Podesta several times in a number of different ways. 

As a partisan satire City Politiques has considerable merit. Its 
salacious scenes, to be sure, are offensive enough to the modern 
reader, who misses many of the political hits. But Crowne's object 
was not so much to be indecent, as to make the Whigs ridiculous, 
and in using indecency for this purpose he was merely following 
the fashion of his time. 

SIR COURTLY NICE 

Crowne's next play, Sir Courtly Nice, was published at some 
time between June and November, 1685. As to its composition we 
are fortunate in having detailed and trustworthy contemporary evi- 
dence. We may begin with Dennis's account, which though not 
written until about 1719, appears to be accurate in the main. 

"It was at the latter End of King Charles' Reign, that Mr. 
Crown being tyr'd with the Fatigue of Writing, and shock'd 
by the Uncertainty of Theatrical Success, and desirous to shel- 
ter himself from the Resentments of those numerous Enemies 
which he had made by his City Politicks, made his Application 
immediately to the King himself ; and desir'd his Majesty to 
establish him in some Office, that might be a security to him for 
life. The King had the Goodness to assure him, he should have 
an office, but added that he would first see another Comedy. 
Mr. Crown endeavouring to excuse himself, by telling the King 
that he plotted slowly and awkwardly; the King replyed that 
he would help him to a Plot, and so put into his Hands the 
Spanish Comedy called Non pued Esser. Mr. Crown was 
oblig'd immediately to go to work upon it; but after he had 

298 Jonson, Volpone; or the Fox, Act I, sc. 1 — Works, II, 106. 

294 Works, II, 135. 

295 Works, II, 136. 



138 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

writ three acts of it, found to his surprise, that the Spanish 
Play had some time before been translated, and acted, and 
dam'd, under the Title of Tarugo's Wiles, or the Coffee-House. 
Yet, supported by the King's Command, he went boldly on and 
finish'd it; and here see the influence of Royal Encourage- 
ment . . . "'«« 

The dedication which Crowne prefixed to the play substantiates the 
statements of Dennis that it was written at the command of Charles 
II, who furnished him with the Spanish play from which he "took 
part o' the name, and design. "^^^ Oldmixon, the historian, who says 
he had the story often from the poet himself, adds that Charles 
''oblig'd the Author to bring it to him Scene by Scene as he wrote it." 
He states further that the king highly approved of the work, except 
that "it wanted a little more of what Collier calls Smut in his View 
of the Stage."29« 

After reviewing the drama critically, Dennis continues as fol- 
lows: 

"The play was now just ready to appear to the World; and 
every one who had seen it rehears'd was highly pleas'd with 
it; every one who had heard of it was big with expectation of 
it; and Mr. Crown was delighted with the flattering Hope of 
being made happy for the rest of his life ; by the Performance 
of the King's Promise; when upon the very last Day of the 
Rehearsal, he met Cave Underbill coming from the Play-house 
as he himself was going toward it : upon which the Poet repri- 
manding the- Player for neglecting so considerable a Part as 
he had in the Comedy, and neglecting it on a Day of so much 
consequence, as the very last Day of Rehearsal : Oh Lord, Sir, 
says Underbill, we are all undone. Wherefore, says Mr. Crown, 
is the Play-house on Fire ? The whole Nation, replys the Player, 
will quickly be so, for the King is dead. At the hearing which 
dismal Words, the Author was little better . . ."^^® 

As a matter of fact the king did not die until three days later, but 
the effect upon Crowne was the same; he had lost his patron and 
his opportunity of retiring from the theatre. 

Charles II died on February 6, 1685 and James immediately 
ascended the throne. According to Downes,^^° Sir Courtly Nice 

296 Dennis, Original Letters, I, 51-52. 

297 Works, III, 254. More fully Crowne writes: — "This comedy was written by the 
sacred command of our late most excellent King, of ever blessed and beloved memory. 

. . . The greatest pleasure he had from the stage was in comedy, and he often 
commanded me to write it, and lately gave me a Spanish play call'd No Puedesser, or 
It cannot Be; out of which I took part o' the name, and design o' this." 

298 John Oldmixon, The History of England During the Reigns of the Royal House of 
Stuarts, London, 1730, p. 690. Robt. Dodsley, Theatrical Records, p. 73, says of Sir 
Courtly Nice, "King Charles II. wrote two Acts of this play." The Merry King was a 
clever man, but we had not known him for a playwright before! 

299 Dennis, I, 53-54. 

300 Roscius Anglicanus, p. 40-41. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 139 

was the first new play to be produced in James's reign. Inasmuch 
as it was ready for representation when Charles II died, its com- 
position may safely be assigned to 1684 and its production to the 
spring of 1685. 

The new play was a great success, as we may gather from the 
author's statement in the dedication to the first edition, published 
at some time between June and November, 1685 :^°^ "This comedy 
has rais'd itself such a fortune in the world, I believe it will not 
soon run away."^°^ Langbaine, writing in 1691, says that it *'is 
accounted an excellent Comedy, and has been frequently acted with 
good applause."^^^ The testimony of Downes is the same. Crowne's 
own prophecy, just quoted, is borne out by his remark in 1698 that 
"Sir Courtly Nice was as fortunate a comedy as has been written 
in this age."^°* Quarto editions were published in 1685, 1693, and 
1703, and from the title pages we gather that it was frequently acted 
during these years, since each title-page reads ''As it is acted" by 
his or her Majesty's servants. Beginning with 1703 there are rec- 
ords which show that for the next thirty odd years Sir Courtly Nice 
was acted practically every year, and occasionally twice a year. We 
may conclude, therefore, that it was no less popular in the years 
preceding 1703. There was a notable revival of it in 1746, when 
it was acted about eleven times. It was given four times in the 
1750's, and thrice in the 1760's. The latest performances were 
in 1770 and 1781.^^^ Thus it held its place in the repertory 
of the English theatre for nearly a hundred years after its first 
appearance. In addition to the three quarto editions already re- 
ferred to, it was reprinted in 1724, 1731, 1735, 1750, and 1765. 
It appeared in a German translation entitled "Sir Phantast, oder Es 
Kann Nicht Seyn" in 1767, and was adapted as "Unmogliche Sache" 
in 1782.3«« 

The plot is as follows : Lord Bellguard has a peculiar "hum- 
our" as to the proper means of safeguarding a woman's honor. He 
believes that she should be kept from the conversation of men, and 
to this end he establishes in his house Hothead, a choleric Tory, 

SOiArber, Term Catalogue, II, 147. 

302 Works, III, 257. 

303 Langbaine, 97. 

304 Works, IV, 353, Caligula, the Epistle to the Reader. 

305 These dates are from Genest, II-VI. For performances between 1703 and 1781, 
see the following pages: II, 295, 303, 317, 333, 339, 358, 363, 388, 407, 443, 468, 471, 
480, 493, 506, 521, 549, 578, 599, 601, 612, 635; III, 1, 45, 67, 99, 106, 129, 160, 175, 
184, 235, 255, 291, 326, 363, 442, 474; IV, 48, 66, 184, 191, 201, 211, 281, 340, 381, 
383, 541, 593, 594; V, 57, 286; VI, 195. 

306 Grosse, 46. 



140 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Testimony, a hypocritical Presbyterian, and an amorous maiden aunt, 
to watch over the chastity of his sister Leonora. Leonora is in 
love with Farewel, a young man of fortune, but there is a feud 
of long standing between his family and hers. Bellguard himself 
is in love with Violante, a young lady of quality and fortune, and 
she with him; but she is unwilling to sacrifice her liberty to his 
domestic tyranny. In ignorance of his sister's affair with Farewel, 
Bellguard plans for her marriage with Sir Courtly Nice, a fas- 
tidious lady-like fop whom she detests. In order to circumvent 
Bellguard, Farewel secures the assistance of Crack, a wizard. 
Violante also lends her aid by persuading a suitor of hers, one 
Surly, the antithesis of Sir Courtly, to oppose Lord Bellguard by 
breaking off the match between Sir Courtly and Leonora. 

In the meantime Crack begins his work. In the guise of a 
tailor he gets entrance to Bellguard's house and delivers to Leonora 
a picture of Farewel and a letter from him. Her brother later dis- 
covers the picture and swears he will have vengeance upon Farewel. 
Leonora protests that her maid found both the picture and the 
letter in Westminster Abbey. Bellguard raves against the maiden 
aunt and the two fanatics ; and the pair, who are always at logger- 
heads, rage at each other. Further developments are arrested, how- 
ever, by the arrival of Crack, disguised as Sir Thomas Calico, the 
son of an old friend of the Bellguard family, late from the Indies. 
He thinks himself bewitched and hates the sight of women. Bell- 
guard is deceived and takes Sir Thomas under his p/otection. The 
latter soon learns from Leonora of the loss of the picture and of 
her white lie about it. Crack soon recovers it from Bellguard by 
a clever trick and allays his suspicions against Farewel. 

Meanwhile Surly has nauseated Sir Courtly by his presence, and 
pretending that he is in love with Leonora, has forced the fop to 
promise to defame his rival; that is, himself. Later, when Sir 
Courtly comes to woo Leonora, she jests with him and brings out 
clearly his effeminate nature. Surly, finding that the fop has not 
kept his promise, challenges him to a duel. While all this is taking 
place Crack again gains admittance for Farewel to Bellguard's 
house by raising a cry of murder outside. Leonora and Farewel 
are thus brought together, but the sudden return of Bellguard 
requires a new stratagem. Crack declares that the women have 
bewitched him, but Farewel is discovered by the aunt, as he escapes 
to Crack's chamber. Bellguard is again aroused, but Crack saves 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 141 

the situation by presenting Farewcl as an old friend of his, who is 
to marry his sister and who has just come to visit him. Bellguard 
apologizes for his suspicions. 

Leonora and Farewel are about to run away together when 
Sir Courtly appears and woos her with his song, "Stop Thief." 
While the fop examines himself in a glass she steals away, and the 
aunt coming from behind, thinks she is being courted. Through 
an ambiguity of phrase he believes that she is speaking for Leonora, 
while she understands that he offers her marriage and consents to 
go secretly to church with him. Leonora, vizarded, escapes with 
Farewel and Crack to Violante's house. The lovers are being 
married when Bellguard arrives. He rages at first, but being in 
Violante's house, he is helpless. Surly is encouraged by Violante to 
claim her hand and arouses Bellguard's jealousy. The clever young 
lady forces Bellguard to promise her the enjoyment of liberty in 
marriage, and then dismisses Surly. Sir Courtly finds that he is 
married to the vizarded aunt. Hothead is commissioned to chastise 
Testimony, who has mistaken the masked Leonora for a prostitute 
and conceived a passion for her. 

For the main incidents in the plot of Sir Courtly Nice Crowne 
was indebted, as we have seen, to a Spanish play furnished to him 
by Charles H. This was the comedy of intrigue No Puede Ser el 
Guardar una Mujer by Agustin Moreto,^^^ which was itself based 
upon El Mayor Impossible of Lope de Vega.^°® For comparison I 
subjoin a brief outline of Moreto's play. 

At a meeting of a little academy at the home of Dona Ana 
Pacheco, an argument develops between Don Felix and Don Pedro, 
two young noblemen, as to whether a woman can be so guarded as 
to be safe from courtship and temptation. Don Pedro holds, con- 
trary to the opinion of the others, that it is possible ; and undertakes 
to demonstrate the truth of his contention by keeping his sister, 
Dona Inez, secluded from intercourse with the outside world. Don 
Felix, for his part, undertakes to prove the fallacy of Don Pedro's 
contention with the assistance of his servant Tarugo, and with the 
connivance of Dona Ana. The latter wishes to correct Don Pedro's 
opinion so that she may safely marry him. The resourceful Tarugo 
by various devices succeeds in interesting the pent-up In:z in the 

307 Moreto's play is to be found in Theatro Hespanol, edited by Don Vincente Garcia, 
Madrid, 1785, Tomo I, Parte Segunda, pp. 1-171; and in Bibliolica de Autores Espanoles, 
Comedias . . . de Don Agustin Moreto, Madrid, 1856, pp. 187-208. 

308 Alfred Gassier, Le Theatre Espagnol, p. 382; A. F. Von Schack, Geschichte der 
dramatischen Liter atur und Kunst in Spanien, III, 352. 



142 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

intrigue, and in withdrawing her from her brother's house in spite 
of his precautions. In the course of the intrigue Inez and Don 
FeHx fall in love, and when at length Don Pedro is made aware 
of their marriage he admits the folly of his theory and Dona Ana 
accepts him as her husband. 

A comparison of the Spanish play with Sir Courtly Nice at 
once reveals the borrowings. The part of Tarugo, which is the 
central feature of No Puede Ser, is transferred in its entirety to the 
English play in the role of Crack. Don Pedro becomes Lord Bell- 
guard; Dona Inez is transformed into Leonora, and Dona Ana into 
her friend, Violante, while Don Felix becomes Leonora's lover, 
Farewel. Many traits of the original characters are retained. Don 
Diego, the shadowy potential rival of Don Felix in No Puede Ser 
is metamorphosed into the distinctly individualized Sir Courtly Nice. 
In this case Crowne borrowed only the occasion for his character's 
existence. In a similar way the role of Alberto, the trusty relative 
of Don Pedro, whose duty it is to guard the portals of the fortress, 
is enlarged to include that interesting group of Lord Bellguard's 
kinsfolk, the amorous aunt. Hothead, and Testimony. For Surly 
there is no suggestion in the Spanish play. He is Crowne's crea- 
tion to serve as a dramatic contrast to Sir Courtly. Thus Crowne 
has added four important persons to his dramatis personae : Sir 
Courtly Nice and Surly, Testimony and Hothead. 

The main incidents of the intrigue Crowne utilized practically 
as he found them. Indeed, such a course was necessary if he was 
to retain the character of Tarugo, round which the Spanish play 
centers. The English adapter contented himself with an improve- 
ment of the motivation and with giving to certain characters a new 
emphasis. In this process he discarded the argument concerning 
the thesis of the play, and substituted a feud between the Bellguard 
and Farewel families which adds zest to the intrigue. The conflict 
is further heightened by the new emphasis which is laid on Sir 
Courtly as a rival of Farewel. In general, it was Crowne's purpose 
to increase the amount of action and complication which he found 
in the Spanish drama, so that his play would conform to the taste 
of the English public. To this purpose and to a desire for contrast 
we are indebted for the additional characters of Surly, Hothead, 
Testimony, and the aunt. 

A discussion of the sources of Sir Courtly Nice involves the 
consideration, likewise, of Thomas St. Serfe's translation of 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 143 

Moreto's play in his Tarugo's Wiles, or The Coffee-house. Accord- 
ing to Dennis, Crowne was not aware of the existence of St. Serfe's 
play until he had written three acts of Sir Courtly Nice; and then, 
encouraged by the king, he continued his work.^*^^ Tarugo's Wiles 
had been acted at the Duke's Theatre in Lincoln's-Inn-Fields in the 
autumn of 1667,^^° but it was damned after the third performance.^^^ 
Charles II had been present at one of these representations, but he 
may have agreed with Pepys that it was a ''ridiculous, insipid 
play,"^^^ and may have forgotten it promptly. At any rate, he prob- 
ably did not have it in mind when he gave Moreto's play to Crowne 
some seventeen years later.^^^ Except for one act — ^the coffee-house 
scene, which is entirely extraneous — Tarugo's Wiles is a slavish 
but very poor imitation of the Spanish comedy. 

Grosse finds in Tarugo's Wiles the intermediate source of Sir 
Courtly Nice. He is able to point out certain particulars in which 
the two English dramas agree, but in which they differ from the 
Spanish work. For example, there is an intimacy from the begin- 
ning between Liviana and Horatio in St. Serfe's play and between 
Leonora and Farewel in Sir Courtly Nice, whereas in No Puede Ser 
Felix develops love for Inez in the course of the intrigue. In the 
second place, says Grosse, Don Patricio and Bellguard undertake 
to guard Liviana and Leonora in order to protect her from the 
prevailing Hcentiousness of society, while Don Pedro undertakes to 
guard Inez as a result of vexation. Finally, both Crowne and St. 
Serfe enlarge the importance of the rival to whom the brother wishes 
to marry his sister. ^^* The first two agreements which Grosse notes 
are the result, directly or indirectly, of the omission of the scene in 
which the question of guarding a woman is debated. Crowne saw 
fit to omit this scene just as St. Serfe did, but the reason for the 
omission in both cases is to be found in the fact that the scene is 
foreign to English ideas of motivation. If we may believe Dennis's 
assertion that Crowne had written three acts of his play before he 
was aware that Tarugo's Wiles existed, we may reasonably infer 
that he had already dropped the scene in which Pedro is challenged 
to prove his contention, and that therefore as a matter of course, 

309 Dennis, Original Letters, I, 53-54. 

310 Pepys' Diary, Oct. 5, 1667. 

311 Roscius Anglicanus, p. 31. 

312 Pepys' Diary, Oct. 15, 1667. 

313 Grosse, p. 45, thinks that Charles II may have given No Puede Ser to Crowne 
in the hope of getting a better rendering than resulted in Tarugo's Wiles f 

314 Grosse, pp. 50-51. 



144 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

he had given Bellguard the natural motive for secluding Leonora, 
and had provided the latter with a full-blown lover. As to the 
character of the rival for the sister's hand, I cannot agree with 
Grosse that St. Serfe has enlarged his importance in any consider- 
able degree. Roderigo is differentiated from Moreto's Diego by 
being a country gentleman fond of the country ways, and by lack- 
ing any particular enthusiasm for the lady in question. On the 
other hand, as an acting character Roderigo is of little more signi- 
ficance than Diego. This is very far from being the case with Sir 
Courtly Nice. Crowne may conceivably have drawn some sugges- 
tions from Tarugo's Wiles, but they are not apparent. 

The influence of Moliere which was so evident in The Countrey 
Wit is not entirely wanting in Sir Courtly Nice. The character 
of the amorous aunt was suggested by Belise in Les Femmes Sav- 
antes. Sir Courtley, like Clitandre, appeals to the aunt for assist- 
ance, and Leonora's aunt, like Belise, mistakes the appeal for a 
declaration of love. In both incidents the effect is produced by 
ambiguity of phrase.^^^ The song, "Stop Thief," which Sir Courtly 
sings to Leonora, is a free rendering of Mascarille's song, "Au Vol- 
eur," in Les Precieuses Ridicule s.^'^^ The version which Crowne 
used is from Flecknoe's Demoiselle a la Mode,^'^'' Act III, scene 3, 
but there is an echo of Mascarille's remark, "Ne diriez-vous pas 
que c'est un homme que crie et court apres un voleur pour le faire 
arreter? Au voleur, au voleur, au voleur, au voleur!" in Sir Court- 
ly's words, "So I make the voice shake at the last Hne in imitation 
of a man that runs after a thief. Sto — ho — ho — hop — ^thief !" 

Sir Courtly Nice as a character continues the type of fop which 
Etherege inaugurated with his Sir Fopling Flutter, but he is not 
an imitation. Flutter delights in the use of French words and in 
appearing to be Parisian, while Sir Courtly is thoroughly English. 
Both are lacking in wit and both are fastidious about their clothes, 
but Sir Courtly is distinct in being "over-curious in his diet." As 
Henry Fielding expressed it, "Every person, for instance, can dis- 
tinguish between Sir Epicure Mammon and Sir Foppling Flutter; 
but to note the difference between Sir Foppling Flutter and Sir 
Courtly Nice requires more exquisite judgement. "^^® 

Sir Courtly Nice is by all odds the best play which Crowne pro- 

315 Moliere, Les Femmes Savantes, Act I, sc. 4 — Sir Courtly Nice. Works, III, 342-4. 

316 Moliere, Les Precieuses Ridicules, sc. IX — Works, III, 340. 

317 Maidment and Logan, Works, III, 251 and Grosse, p. 54. I have been unable 
to see Flecknoe's play. 

318 Henry Fielding, Tom Jones, Book X, chap. 1. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 145 

duced. Although it is not equal to the best comedies of the Restora- 
tion period, it held its own with them on the stage for a hundred 
years. Its chief merit, perhaps, lies in the fact that as an adapta- 
tion, it is an improvement upon its source. ]\Ioreto's play is greatly 
superior to Tarugo's Wiles, but by the same token Sir Courtly Nice 
is superior to No Piiede Ser. In the first place, Crowne made out 
of a comedy of intrigue a comedy of manners which reflects the life 
of the time. He added original characters and made them a part 
of the piece. The character of Crack is still farcical, it is true, but 
the main comic emphasis is no longer upon his schemes.^^^ The 
somewhat colorless characters Crowne improved by making their 
traits more distinct and lifelike. Farewel is more clearly delineated 
than Don Felix. Leonora appears to better advantage than Dona 
Inez. Violante does not retain Dona Ana's fondness for academic 
pursuits, but she possesses energetic qualities of her own. It is in 
his original characters, however, that Crowne is best. Sir Courtly 
as the over-fastidious fop we have considered in connection with 
his predecessor. Sir Fopling Flutter. Both Etherege and Crowne 
follow the technique of IMoliere in delaying the entry of their fops 
until the third act, when the situation has been thoroughly prepared 
for them. The blunt, matter-of-fact, dirty Surly provides excellent 
contrast to Sir Courtly. Similarly there is a noteworthy contrast 
between Hothead and Testimony. They are representatives of the 
two extreme political factions of the time, but Crowne treats them 
more impartially than he did the political characters in City Poli- 
tiques. He now satirized the defects of both parties. This effective 
use of contrast is another element of Moliere's technique which 
Crowne had learned to value. 

DARIUS, KING OF PERSIA 
Darius, King of Persia was the first drama which Crowne 
wrote after the death of Charles II, by whose decease he lost his 
patron and his favor at court, and therefore was under the necessity 
of continuing his play-writing for a livelihood. The reason that 
Crowne did not follow up the great success of Sir Courtly Nice with 
a comedy he himself explains in the dedication of his new play. 
He was the victim of a "tedious sickness," else he "had not meddled 
with tragedy" at a time when the taste of the public was strongly in 
favor of comedy.^^^ 

319 During the eighteenth century Sir Courtly Nice was sometimes played with Crack, 
Hothead, and Testimony omitted entirely. 

320 Works, III, 370. 



146 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

The play was acted, in all probability, in April, 1688, for on 
May 5th of that year Lord Granville wrote to Sir William Leveson : 
"The town is as empty of news as the Court; we have had a 
new play called The Fall of Darius (written by Crown), by 
which the poet, though he could get no fame, yet had a most 
extraordinary third day by reason of the King's presence at 
it; the first day of its acting Mrs. Bower [Mrs. Barry] was 
taken so violently ill in the midst of her part that she was forced 
to be carried off and instead of dying in jest was in danger of 
doing it in earnest."^^^ 

Further evidence for the date is found in the year of publication. 
Darius was advertised in the Term Catalogue as a publication of 
Trinity term, 1688; that is, between May and July of that year.^^^ 
The title-page of this edition contains the words "as it is acted by 
their Majesties servants. "^^^ The evidence which Lord Granville 
gives concerning the unfortunate circumstances connected with the 
first performance is corroborated by Crowne himself in his dedica- 
tion: 

"A misfortune fell upon this play, that might very well dizzy 
the judgment of my audience. Just before the play began, 
Mrs. Barry was struck with a very violent fever, that took all 
spirit from her, by consequence from the play; the scenes she 
acted fell dead from her; and in the fourth act her distemper 
grew so much upon her, she cou'd go on no farther, but all 
her part in that act was wholly cut out, and neither spoke nor 
read; that the people went away without knowing the con- 
texture of the play yet thought they knew all."^^* 

Crowne testifies also to the presence of King James on the third 
day, and returns thanks to him for the favor .^^® That the receipts 
were extraordinary, as Lord Granville says, the author himself 
bears witness when he writes, "Let men have what opinions they 
will of this play, they have paid me for them and paid me hand- 
somely." Thus it appears that though Darius was not a success 
on the stage, the author received considerable satisfaction in the 
financial returns. It was published, as we have seen, in the sum- 
mer of 1688 by two printing firms, each having a half interest.^^® 
Before the time of Crowne the subject of Darius had been 

321 Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, Fifth Report, 1876, pp. 197-98. 

322 Arber, Term Catalogue, II, 231. It was entered on the Stationer's Register June 
12, 1688. Cf. A Transcript of the Registers of the Stationers' Company, 1640-1708, 
A. D., Ill, 333. 

323 Original Quarto of Darius, 1688. 

324 Works, III, 371 

325 Works, III, 372. 

326 A Transcript of the Registers of the Stationers Company, 1640-1708, III, 333. 
Richard Bentley had one half interest, and Joseph Knight and Francis Saunders, the 
other. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 147 

treated in English by William Alexander, first earl of Stirling, in 
a riming play on the classical model in 1603,^" but our author owes 
nothing to this tragedy and was probably unaware of its existence. 
More recently Nathaniel Lee had scored a great success in his 
tragedy, The Rival Queens, or The Death of Alexander the Great 
(1677), which brought the daughter of Darius and his aged mother 
upon the stage, and treated of him incidentally. Crowne felt obliged, 
therefore, to omit the persons of Darius' family from his play, and 
in this he was supported by the advice of friends.^^^ In the place 
of these characters he introduced the episodes connected with Bar- 
zana and Memnon, "obscurely descended," he says, "from my fancy." 

The story as Crowne tells it is as follows : The action begins 
at a time when Darius and the Persians have been defeated by 
Alexander, and his wife and children captured by the Macedonian 
king. He still has an army of seven hundred thousand Persians 
left, however, and a great deal of courage. Artabasus, his general, 
Patron, a faithful Greek ally, and Memnon son of Bessus are loyal 
to him ; but the other Persian leaders, Bessus, Nabarzanes, and Dat- 
aphernes, plot their own advantage, and in the ensuing battle with- 
draw their aid at a critical moment. Misfortunes accumulate upon 
Darius. The battle is lost, and he receives news of the death of his 
queen while she was an honored prisoner in the hands of Alexan- 
der. The disloyal leaders ask Darius to resign his crown to Bessus, 
that his own misfortunes may not ruin Persia. Patron is loyal, but 
even Artabasus thinks this course best. Darius upbraids them bit- 
terly, but they protest their love for him. The plotters continue 
their activities, and Patron, discovering them, asks Darius to allow 
him and his Greeks to be a body guard ; but the king will not hear 
of it. He will do nothing to deserve his fall. At the approach of 
Alexander the Persians flee, and Darius in despair wishes to kill 
himself ; but Artabasus prevents him. Thereupon Bessus and Nab- 
arzanes take the opportunity to seize Darius, pretending that they 
will guard him. Later, when Darius refuses their humble requests 
for power, they murder him. Artabasus and Patron, however, over- 
come Bessus and Nabarzanes in battle; and when they learn that 
the king has been killed, they execute the murderers. At the close 
the ghost of Darius appears in brilliant state. 

Running parallel to the main historical action, there is a love 
plot which concerns the ambitious Bessus, Memnon, his son by an 

327 The Poetical Works of Sir William Alexander, Glasgow, 1872, II, 1-85. 

328 Works, III, 370. 



148 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Amazonian queen, and Barzana, a royal princess who is the recent 
bride of Bessus. Before the time of the play Memnon has rescued 
Barzana in battle and mutual admiration has follov/ed, only to be 
cut short by the exigencies of battle. Later Barzana has been forced 
to marry Bessus. She soon discovers to her horror that Memnon, 
whom she loves is her husband's son ; and to protect herself she asks 
Bessus that Memnon never be allowed to see her. Bessus complies 
and banishes Memnon, but grants the latter's wish that he may take 
with him the lady of his heart. Memnon, not knowing Barzana's 
name indicates her to Bessus; and the father becomes suspicious 
instantly and resolves to establish his wife's infidelity. Memnon 
meets Barzana to her great distress and reveals his love. She de- 
lays informing him of their relation until they meet a second time. 
When she reveals it, he faints and she is supporting him in her arms 
when Bessus appears. The enraged father kills Memnon, and Bar- 
zana stabs herself after she has declared their innocence. 

The main historical action of Crowne's Darius extends from a 
period subsequent to the battle of Cilicia to the time of the murder 
of Darius, and includes the battle of Arbela. The chief incidents 
and the historical background are drawn from Books II-VII of the 
De Gestis Alexandri Magni of Quintus Curtius.^^^ The main inci- 
dents which are dramatized, however, are taken from Books IV and 
V, especially the latter. Until he accounts for the punishment meted 
out to Bessus and Nabarzanes, Crowne, generally speaking, follows 
Curtius closely. The chief episode in Act I, — the scene in which 
Tyriotes brings word to Darius of the death of the queen and of 
the manner in which Alexander has honored her, — is a slight ex- 
pansion of Curtius's account in Book IV, chapter 10. The sub- 
sequent historical action of the play from the time when Darius 
addresses his leaders in Act II until Polystratus finds him lying 
mortally wounded in a wagon, and gives him a drink of spring water 
out of his helmet, in Act V, follows closely chapters 8-13 of Book V. 
The fate of Bessus is narrated in Book VI, chapters 4 to 6, and in 
Book VII, chapters 4 and 5. According to Curtius, Nabarzanes 
was pardoned by Alexander, while Bessus after assuming the royal 
dignity, was betrayed into his hands. The Macedonian delivered 
him to the brother of Darius, and he was tortured to death. For 
dramatic purposes Crowne departs from this account and makes 
both Bessus and Nabarzanes fall victims to the forces of Artabasus 

329 Q. Curtius Rufus, Historiarum Alexandri Magni Macedonis, edited by Theo. 
Vogel, Lipsiae, 1893. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 149 

and Patron. The name Dataphernes seems to have been drawn from 
Book VII, chapter 5. 

The love plot in Darius, which runs its course independently 
of the historical part, and which concerns the characters of Bessus, 
Memnon, and Barzana, owes its origin to the Hip poly tus of Euripi- 
des. ^^*^ In that play Phaedra, the wife of Theseus, king of Athens, 
becomes enamoured of Hippolytus, bastard son of her husband and 
an Amazonian queen, through the evil influence of Aphrodite. As 
she is a virtuous matron, her infatuation makes her wretched; and 
after much misery she is persuaded by her nurse to reveal the situa- 
tion to her. The old woman, thinking to remedy matters, brings 
Hippolytus into Phaedra's presence and only makes matters worse. 
She hangs herself, leaving a note which lays the blame upon Hip- 
polytus. Theseus, convinced that his son has violated his wife, is 
indirectly responsible for his death. Diana clears up matters, estab- 
lishing the innocence of Phaedra and Hippolytus; and Theseus re- 
pents his action. 

The similarity between this plot and that of Crowne is im- 
mediately evident. Barzana, like Phaedra, falls in love with a bas- 
tard son of her husband by an Amazonian queen. Barzana reveals 
her secret love for Memnon to Oronte, her confidante, only after 
great effort and much misery. In a similar manner after much suf- 
fering and mental agony, Phaedra reveals her secret to her old 
nurse. Oronte brings Memnon into Barzana's presence just as the 
nurse conducts Hippolytus to Phaedra . Theseus, convinced of his 
son's guilt, is indirectly responsible for his death, while Bessus slays 
his own son. Both Phaedra and Barzana commit suicide, although 
under somewhat different circumstances. In the end the innocence 
of both parties is made clear. Thus it is evident that there is a 
certain rough correspondence between Bessus and Theseus, Memnon 
and Hippolytus, Barzana and Phaedra, Oronte and the nurse. 
Crowne's chief variation is to make the attraction between Barzana 
and Memnon mutual, whereas Hippolytus has no love for Phaedra. 
The charge of inconstancy is brought by Bessus against Barzana, 
while in Euripides Phaedra at her death inculpates Hippolytus. 
Furthermore, one of the dramatic situations which Euripides created 
was utilized effectively by Crowne. The scene in which Barzana, 
after much misery and mental agony finally reveals her secret love 

330 Langbaine, p. 97, pointed out this possibility. 



150 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

for Memnon to Oronte, is a reworking of a similar scene between 
Phaedra and her nurse.^^^ 

While Crowne thus went to Euripides for the framework and 
characters of his sub-plot, he borrowed the names of his hero and 
heroine from "The History of Barsina," a minor story in La Cal- 
prenede's Cassandra.^^^ The story of Barsina has thus been sum- 
marized: "Barsina, a Persian lady of noble rank, is beloved by 
Memnon, one of the first noblemen of the kingdom, and also by 
Oxyartes, brother to the king. At first friendly toward each other, 
the two suitors gradually drift into strained relations. Memnon re- 
fuses to fight with Oxyartes because Oxyartes is the king's brother, 
and accordingly leaves the country, resigning his claim to Barsina. 
Oxyartes refuses to accept this sacrifice; and Memnon returning, 
marries Barsina. Memnon shortly after his marriage is killed in 
battle, and Barsina marries Oxyartes. "^^^ Crowne might have bor- 
rowed the name 'Memnon' from Curtius, who describes a Rhodian 
general of that name in Book II ; but the association of Memnon 
with Barsina, — only a slight variation from Barzana, the form which 
Crowne used, — indicates that he had La Calprenede's story in mind. 

With this borrowing as a cue, a case might be made for Crowne's 
use of Cassandra for other portions of his play. Mr. Herbert W. 
Hill has pointed out the similarity between certain passages of La 
Calprenede's account of Darius and several speeches of the Darius 
in Crowne's play. The phrasing is frequently close.^^* In every 
instance, however. La Calprenede is translating Curtius, whose work 
Crowne refers us to in his dedication. I am, therefore, of the 
opinion of Mr. Hill that Crowne depended on Curtius rather than 
on La Calprenede for the historical material in his play.^^° 

As a poetic production, Darius is rather better than the average 
of Crowne's tragedies, and contains many good lines. True, the 
speeches of Darius are sometimes tedious, but on the other hand 
there are fewer flat passages and much less bombast than in The 
Ambitious Statesman. The story of the fall of Darius does not 
lend itself so readily to dramatic treatment as the history of his 
family ; but, as we have seen, Lee had already utilized that subject. 

331 Euripides, Hippolytus, translated by T. A. Buckley, New York. 1865. I. 179-189. 
—Works, III, 410-413. 

382 Cassandra, the Fam'd Romance . . . rendered into English by Sir Charles 
Cotterell, London, 1676, Part V, Book III. pp. 509-523. 

333 For this summary, see Herbert W. Hill, La Calprenede's Romances and the 
Restoration Drama, p. 7. 

384 Compare, for example, Cassandra, op. cit., p. 70, Curtius, op. cit. Book IV. ch. 
14, and Crowne, Works, III, 391. 

335 Herbert W. Hill, op. cit., pp. 46, note 1; 103, note 2. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 151 

Crowne must be given credit for considerable skill in borrowing and 
adapting a love plot which suited so well the other matter of the 
play. It is likely that the part of Barzana was written by Crowne 
with Mrs. Barry in mind, and it is easily conceivable that a skilful 
acting of the part would have made the play much more of a success 
than it was. The appearance of the ghost of Darius smiling with 
evident satisfaction at the fate of Bessus and Nabarzanes strikes 
the modern reader as incongruous. However, ghosts were then the 
fashion in tragedy.^^^ The characterization of Barzana is fairly 
well executed. Darius is conceived in a sympathetic manner, but the 
author does not succeed in arousing any great interest in him. Of 
the remaining figures, Bessus and Memnon are best individualized. 

THE ENGLISH FRIER 

The English Frier marks the culmination of a series of attacks 
which Crowne made against Roman Catholicism. He began his 
open hostiHty with the production of The Ambitious Statesman in 
1679. This was followed in 1680 by The Miseries of Civil-War 
and in 1681 by Henry the Sixth, the First Part, which was sup- 
pressed, as we have seen, because of its anti-Catholic character. In 
Thyestes (1681), although the theme is classical, we find a severe 
arraignment of priests. Crowne's next plays, City Politiques and 
Sir Courtly Nice, afforded no particular opportunity for satirizing 
Catholics; but after an enforced silence during the short reign of 
James II, our author seized his first opportunity for renewing his 
animosity. In 1689 he had much more material for such satire than 
in the time of the Popish Plot. During his short reign James II 
had done many things to advance the cause of his own religion and 
consequently to antagonize staunch Englishmen who associated the 
Protestant religion with the idea of patriotism and loyalty. He had 
retained Catholic officers in the standing army contrary to the test 
oaths, and in 1687 he had instituted the declaration for "liberty of 
conscience." Moreover, he had elevated Edward Petre, a Jesuit 
priest, to the rank of a privy councillor and to a place of great in- 
fluence at court. Therefore, when William of Orange landed on 
the English coast in November, 1688, to protect the Protestant 
reHgion from disaster, and James and his Catholic adherents were 

336 The ghost of Darius had already played a part in Lee's Rival Queens. (1677) 
Other examples of ghosts may be found in Dryden's Conquest of Granada, Part II (1669- 
70), in Otway's Venice Preserv'd (1682), in Settle's Cambyses (1666) and The Female 
Prelate (1680). 



152 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

forced to flee, Crowne found himself in a position to satirize the 
Catholic priesthood without restraint. 

The English Frier,^^'^ in all likelihood, was not composed or 
even begun until after the flight of James and the accession of Wil- 
liam and Mary. It is scarcely conceivable that Crowne should have 
dared to contemplate an anti-Catholic drama while James was still 
in power.^^* Although the play was not published until the spring of 
1690,^^^ there is every reason to believe that it was acted in the 
autumn of 1689. In the first place Crowne says of himself in the 
prologue. 

"Today he does make bold a farce to shew, 

Priests made and acted here some months ago."^*° 
The priestly farce came to an end in December 1688 with the flight 
of James ;^^^ hence "some months ago" refers back to that time from 
the distance of a half-year or more, probably from the beginning of 
the theatrical season in the autumn of 1689. A further historical 
reference in the epilogue substantiates this date. Crowne writes 
" 'Tis treason now French interest to advance : 

And French commodities are all by law 

Doom'd to be burnt. "^*^ 
On August 24, 1689, Parliament passed an act forbidding all trade 
and commerce with France. Among other things this act prohibited 
the importation of, or trade in paper, or in "any Goods, Commodi- 
ties or Manufactures made of, or mixed with Silk, Thread, Wooll, 
Hair, Gold, Silver, Leather." If any such were found, "the said 
Linens, Silks, Salt, or Paper . . . shall be publicly Burnt and 
Destroyed."^*^ It is likely that the playwright's reference to the 
statute would be made at a time shortly after its enactment, when 
it was prominent in the public consciousness ; that is, in the autumn 
of 1689. As I have already said, The English Frier was first printed 
in 1690. 

337 It is an obvious suggestion that Crowne drew his title, "The English Frier" from 
Dryden's famous tragi-comedy with a similar name, The Spanish Friar. Plausibility is 
lent to this suggestion by the fact that while representation of Dryden's play had been 
forbidden during the reign of James II, it was acted in June 1689, and was the first 
play which Queen Mary saw after her return to England. Incidentally several passages 
referring to Queen Leonora as a usurper caused Queen Mary to blush and to use her 
fan to conceal her confusion. There is a rare possibility that Dryden's play may have 
suggested to Crowne his satire against friars and priests, but, on the other hand, it is 
likely that he was already at work on his play before June, 1689, since he was a slow 
plotter. Cf. Genest, I, 473-4. 

338 Crosse, p. 60, infers from the prologue that The English Frier was written in 
1688, but for the reason stated above, I consider this an erroneous inference. 

339Arber, Term Catalogue, II, 313. 
340 Works, IV, 27. 

841 Ranke, A History of England, IV, 462, 466. 

842 Works, IV, 121. 

343 Public Acts of William and Mary, p. 475 ff. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 153 

Crowne's play had a brief and stormy career. Upon its first 
appearance, the enemies whom the dramatist had raised up as a 
result of his City Politiques, made such a commotion in the pit that 
the actors could not be heard. "They ran upon edge and point, and 
fought it with head, stick and heel." Presumably it was withdrawn 
after the third night. "The players," says Crowne, "thought fit to 
keep it down, to preserve the peace of the stage, for otherwise they 
would never have given over a play which brought so much good 
company together, as this did on the third day, by its own 
strength."^** 

The plot of this play, which gave offense to so many, is as fol- 
lows : Lord Stately, a vain, ceremonious nobleman, who worships 
titles and seeks advancement at court, has two attractive daughters, 
Laura, "a great Gallant and Coquet," and Julia, a quiet, sensible 
girl. Lord Wiseman and Mr. Bellamour, respectable Protestant 
young men, are suitors for their hands and are acceptable to their 
father. Lord Stately himself is a suitor for the hand of Lady Pinch- 
gut, a rich Catholic widow, who is so parsimonious with her ser- 
vants that her coachman complains of being starved and ill-clothed. 
Madam Airy, the mistress of Wiseman, is jealous of Laura as the 
proposed wife of her lover; and incites Young Ranter, an obstrep- 
erous drinking bully, who is encouraged to lewdness by his father 
and Dullman, to make love to Laura. The opportunity is offered 
when Laura, pretending illness, receives Ranter in her bedchamber. 
They are interrupted, however, by the unexpected arrival of Lord 
Stately with Wiseman and Bellamour. Wiseman is suspicious, and 
Stately insists that Laura be let blood. Meanwhile, Lord Stately 
has bargained with Father Finical, a Catholic friar in high favor at 
court, for a blue ribbon in consideration of a payment of three 
thousand guineas. Wiseman and Bellamour dislike Stately's in- 
timacy with friars and priests, and insist that he give them up if 
they are to be friendly with him. In consequence they are dismissed. 
Through Airy's contrivance Laura fails to keep an engagement with 
Wiseman, who is directed by his mistress to her apartments. There 
he finds Laura with Ranter, and challenges him; but the bully es- 
capes. Again through Airy's scheming Ranter is admitted to Laura, 
who continues to dally with him out of pure sport. He, thinking 
that she encourages him, would attempt her virtue; but Wiseman's 
arrival averts the danger and puts Laura to confusion. She and 
Julia thereupon agree to marry Wiseman and Bellamour. 

344 Works, rV, 22-24. 



154 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

In the meantime Father Finical is very popular among the 
ladies, who vie with each other in securing him as confessor and in 
pampering him with tasty viands. He shows particular favor to 
young and beautiful ladies, and improves an opportunity of ex- 
tracting fifty pounds from Lady Pinch-gut for covetousness, on the 
strength of her coachman's complaint. Finical's failure to give the 
coachman a decent share of the penance money calls forth maledic- 
tions on Catholicism. Even Lord Stately has a disagreement with 
the friar when the latter fails to advance him for his three thousand 
guineas. While the ladies and Stately are being gulled of money by 
Finical, Sir Thomas Credulous pretends a serious illness in order to 
expose the friar. He learns that his wife's woman, Pansy, is being 
solicited by Finical, and he arranges with her to trap him. To this 
end he makes a pretended trip to the country with his wife and 
leaves Pansy behind. Wiseman and Bellamour learn of Finical's 
deceptions from Credulous and arrange with him to convince Lord 
Stately and the ladies of the friar's vicious character. The ladies 
vigorously deny the charges against Finical, but are forced to be 
witnesses of the plot. The friar is summoned by a letter from Pansy, 
and he comes eager to enjoy her. In explanation of his carnal pas- 
sion he reveals to her the secret practices of the priests and friars, 
and tells how he cheats Lord Stately, Lady Pinch-gut and the others. 
As he is about to embrace Pansy, his accusers rush upon him and 
force him to settle. Lord Stately renounces Popery and accepts 
Wiseman and Bellamour as sons-in-law. Ranter is married to Airy 
and agrees to reform. 

As is evident from the synopsis. The English Frier is made up 
of two plots loosely woven together. The main action, which con- 
cerns Wiseman, Bellamour, Ranter, Laura, and Julia, is original 
with Crowne ; for the rest of the play, however, he is deeply indebted 
to Moliere.^*^ The main features of the sub-plot, so far as they 
concern Sir Thomas and Lady Credulous, Father Finical and Pansy, 
are drawn from Tartuffe; yet in the strict sense of the word 
Crowne's product is not an adaptation, as Crosse's account would 
lead one to infer.^*® The chief elements of the two plots are the 
same; a hypocrite imposes upon a respectable family; his deceit is 
discovered, and through his weakness for women, he is tricked into 
an exposure of his hypocrisy and sensuality. Father Finical, in spite 

345 Grosse, pp. 62-63, has satisfactorily disposed of the notion that Crowne's play 
owes anything to Medbourne's adaptation of Tartuffe. 

346 Grosse, pp. 62-68; cf. Miles, p. 95. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 155 

of the fact that he is a friar, retains many of the characteristics of 
Tartuffe: he is a hypocrite, an epicurean and an avaricious man. 
As Orgon pampers Tartuffe in his eating and drinking, and is 
soHcitous about his health, so Lady Credulous and her friends pre- 
pare dainty dishes for Father Finical.^*^ Again, Orgon arranges to 
give his property to Tartuffe, while Lady Credulous sacrifices her 
husband's wealth to Finical.^*® The role which Orgon plays as 
chief dupe to Tartuffe is given to Lady Credulous in relation to 
Father Finical, and her name suggests the credulity which possessed 
Orgon. Moliere's dupe had one supporter in his mother, Madame 
Pernelle, but in Crowne several other ladies besides the wife of 
Credulous are tricked by the friar. Moliere employs Elmire, the 
wife of Orgon, to expose the hypocrisy and sensuality of Tartuffe, 
but Crowne uses two characters for this purpose. Sir Thomas Credu- 
lous, and Pansy, his wife's maid. Sir Thomas invents the trap and 
Pansy serves as the bait. 

The seduction scenes are also borrowed from Moliere's comedy. 
Upon the failure of his first attempt to overcome Elmire, Tartuffe 
is accused by Damis, and extricates himself only by great presence 
of mind. A reminiscence of this scene is found in the EngHsh play 
where Lady Credulous comes upon Finical embracing Pansy. The 
friar quiets the lady's suspicions by remarking that Pansy is at con- 
fession.^*® The scene in which Finical is exposed imitates Moliere 
more closely. Like Orgon, Lady Credulous, Lady Pinch-gut and 
the others deny that their saintly friend can be an imposter, and, 
like Orgon, they are forced to be witnesses. In both plays the un- 
believing victims are concealed while the hypocrite is being trapped. 
Finical, like Tartuffe, considers it necessary to make some justifica- 
tion for his carnal weakness. The French imposter shows contempt 
for Elmire's husband to her face, and similarly Father Finical shows 
derision for those whom he has duped. After the exposure is com- 
pleted, the parallel ceases.^^° 

For the character of the parsimonious Lady Pinch-gut Crowne 
was indebted to another of Moliere's plays. To her he has trans- 
ferred a number of the miserly characteristics of Harpagon in 
VAvare. Harpagon begrudges his servants proper clothing, is 
sparing of money for food, and robs his horses of their hay, so that 

347 Moliere, Tartuffe, 1, 4. — Works, IV, 61-2. 

348 Tartuffe, III, 7.— Works, IV, 74. 

349 Tartuffe, III, 6.— Works, IV, 81. 

z^o Tartuffe, IV, 3, S.— Works, IV, 112-118. The character of Wiseman may be 
slightly reminiscent of Cleante, but Grosse carries parallel-hunting too far when he finds 
Dorine, as an opponent of Tartuffe, turning up in the sisters Laura and Julia. 



156 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

they are too weak to draw a carriage. Lady Pinch-gut has all of 
these traits or variants of them. She locks up her servants' liveries 
and keeps them only for show ; she is sparing of candles and flam- 
beaux ; she underfeeds her servants and makes them observe church 
fast-days ; she even locks up the oats for the horses in her closet. ^^^ 
Her comic coachman, who is used to reveal his mistress's parsimony, 
seems to have been suggested by Harpagon's cook-coachman, Maitre 
Jacques. Crowne has shown some skill in these adaptations, for Lady 
Pinch-gut is not only a satire in herself, but serves also to make 
Father Finical more ridiculous. ^^^ 

Although The Englih Frier did not itself become a success on 
the stage, its influence can be traced in a later production. Colley 
Gibber's The N on- Juror, acted in December 1717, is primarily an 
adaptation of Moliere's Tartuffe, but the character of Charles is de- 
rived from Medbourne's Tartuffe, or The French Puritan (1670), 
and the characters of Dr. Wolf and Maria owe something to 
Crowne. ^^^ Dr. Wolf, like Father Finical, is a Roman Catholic 
priest, and each is elevated to the rank of bishop. Maria, instead 
of originating in Moliere's Mariane, was suggested by Crowne's 
coquette, Laura. When Isaac Bickerstaffe adapted The Non-Juror 
for his The Hypocrite (1768), his Charlotte inherited the traits of 
Maria."'* 

Crowne's play, as we have seen, had its origin in the religious 
turmoil of the time, just as his City Politiques was a result of the 
poHtical strife of the Popish Plot period. As before, he was accused 
of representing actual personages, and again he denied the charge."^' 
In our study of the earlier play we have seen that his denial cannot 
bear a close examination. Similarly, in The English Frier, as 
critics have pointed out,"'^ it is likely that Father Finical was in- 
tended as a satire of Edward Petre, clerk of the royal closet to 
James II. Petre, who had suffered arrest and imprisonment at the 
time of the Popish Plot, was at once summoned to court upon the 
accession of James, and was made superintendent of the Royal 
Chapel and clerk of the closet. In November, 1687, he was ap- 

Z^xL'Avare, III, I.— Works, IV, 43-7, 63-6, 92-5, 113. Grosse, p. 68, sees a 
parallel between La Fleche and Lady Pinch-gut's coachman and porter, but without 
reason, it seems to me. 

352 Miles, appendix, p. 229, says that Lord Stately is reminiscent of La Comptesse 
d'Escarbagnas, especially in his treatment of servants, but I doubt if there was any 
conscious suggestion in this case. Crowne could observe such conduct without going 
outside of London. 

353 Genest, II, 615-16. 

354 Genest, V, 218-19. 

355 Works, IV, 20. Preface to Reader. 

356 Maidment and Logan. Works, IV, 4; Grosse, p. 65, accepts the idea, as does Mrs. 
Wright, pp. 157-58. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 157 

pointed a privy councillor, and formed a secret inner council with 
Sunderland, Talbot, and Jermyn. In the summer of 1688 James 
made an effort to get him appointed archbishop of York, but the 
Pope refused on the ground that Petre was a Jesuit. Even before 
this, when it was announced that the queen was with child, a crop 
of scurrilous broadsides grew up against Petre; and when the 
prince was born it was plainly intimated that he was its father.^^^ 
In all of these facts one can see suggestions of Father Finical. He 
is a friar of the convent of St. James and a bishop in partibus.^^^ 
Evidence of his power at court is seen in Stately's attitude towards 
him. Father Finical appears in his episcopal robes and considers 
himself the nobleman's equal, while the latter refers pointedly to 
the friar's advancement.^^^ Furthermore, it is natural, in view of 
the broadside caricatures of Petre as a sensual churchman, that 
Crowne should represent him in that aspect upon the stage. In this 
respect our author was not alone, since Petre was ridiculed in at 
least two anonymous plays of the time. He appears in The Abdi- 
cated Prince (1690) as Pietro, and in The Late Revolution, or the 
Happy Change (1688?) as Father Petre.^^^ In Lord Stately 
Crowne's audience may have recognized some well-known cere- 
monious court parasite, but he is difficult to identify. 

The brief stage career of The English Frier did not do justice 
to its dramatic merits. Its satire is severe but cleverly handled, and 
the characters are not badly drawn. The roles which Crowne bor- 
rowed from Moliere are altered and anglicized. Father Finical 
has the same basic traits as Tartuffe, — hypocrisy, sensuality, avarice, 
— ^but while Tartuffe is a generalized type. Finical is the representa- 
tive of a particular class whose vices Crowne undertook to satirize. 
The transfer of the part of Elmire to Sir Thomas Creduluos and 
Pansy, and that of Orgon to Lady Credulous shows Crowne's skill 
as an adapter. Even more noticeable in this respect is the trans- 
formation of Harpagon into Lady Pinch-gut. Crowne utilizes 
her to bring out the incongruities of her covetousness, but at the 
same time he fits her cleverly into his general scheme of satire 
against the priesthood.^^^ Of the original characters Lord Stately 
deserves especial attention. He is a well drawn example of the 

357D«rf. Nat. Biog., XV, 977-79. 

358 The Count of Adda, Papal Nuncio, had been consecrated archbishop in partibus 
in 1687. Cf. Ranke, A History of England, IV, 331. 

359 Works, IV, 90. 

360 Wright, pp. 160, 162-63. 

361 Miles, p. 158. 



158 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

ceremonious and slavish follower of the whims of court. Laura, 
the coquette, is delineated with vigor and clearness of touch. As we 
have seen, she was the model for Gibber's Maria in The Non-Juror. 
The principal defect of the comedy is its loose structure. The 
entanglement of the main plot is forced and artificial, and there is 
no clear drawn conflict of forces. Furthermore, the connection 
between the two plots is very loose. The relation between Lord 
Stately and Father Finical is a weak link, and no real connection 
is established until Sir Thomas Credulous interests Wiseman in his 
plot to entrap the friar. This looseness of structure, however, 
is a fault which Crowne shares with his contemporaries. 

REGULUS 
Having experienced the disadvantages of political and religious 
satire in comedy by the forced withdrawal of The English Frier, 
Crowne turned his hand to tragedy. Again, as in Darius, he went to 
ancient history for his material. We are fortunate in being able 
to date the publication of Regulus with greater accuracy than has 
usually been the case with Crowne's plays. The Gentleman's Jour- 
nal for May, 1692, announces it: ''We are promised Mr. Crown's 
Regulus, before the Long Vacation,"^®^ and in the June number 
of the same journal we are told that ''Regulus, with the Factions 
of Carthage, by Mr. Crown was acted the last week."^®^ Inasmuch 
as the June number of The Gentleman's Journal was licensed on 
June 17, 1692, the premiere of the play seems to have taken place 
early in that month.^^* Even without this evidence we could be 
certain that Regulus was produced in 1692. In the prologue Crowne 
writes, 

"Methinks the late victorious day has spread 

O'er all your cheeks, a lively pleasing red. 

Our naval glory warms you, flaming joys 

Kindle illuminations in your eyes .... 

Now we once more shall have the full control 

Of our own seas."^^"^ 
This is unquestionably a reference to the Battle of La Hogue, 
May 19, 1692, in which Admiral Russell, though secretly in league 
with James II, was forced by loyal officers under him to engage 

362 The Gentleman's Journal, or The Monthly Miscellany, May 1692 (Licensed May 
14, 1692), p. 26. 

363 Ibid., June, 1692, p. 18. 

364 These references in The Gentleman's Journal have never before been noted. 

365 Works, IV, 133. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 159 

the French fleet under Tourville. The French were preparing for 
the transportation of an army to invade England and to restore 
James II, and the decisive defeat of Tourville completely altered 
their plans.^®^ Still further evidence for the year 1692 is found 
in the presence of Leigh and Mount fort among the names of the 
actors.^^^ The Gentleman's Journal announced the death of Mount- 
fort in November, 1692, and that of Leigh in December of the 
same year.^®® 

In his comments on Reguhis the editor of The Gentleman's 
Journal remarks : "This Tragedy is intermixed with a vein of 
Comedy. You have seen his Works in both. Terence tells us, 
Dubiam fortunam esse scenic am; and if that great Author had 
occasion to complain, those of our Age may well comfort them- 
selves if the Town deceives their expectation."^®^ From this it is 
clear that the play was not favorably received by the public. The 
quarto edition of Regulus bears the date 1694, but The Gentleman s 
Journal for April, 1693 states that the play "is now in the Press." 
Moreover it was advertised in the Term Catalogue as a publication of 
Michaelmas term 1693; that is, between June and November. ^^° 
It doubtless came out in the autumn of 1693 and was dated in 
advance by the bookseller. 

The story of Crowne's play is briefly as follows : Regulus, 
the Roman consul, has been victorious before Carthage, and has 
burned the outlying towns and fortifications. There is consterna- 
tion in the city, and Hamilcar is given forty hours by Asdrubal to 
bring relief or he will take the command himself by force. Urged 
on by Gisgon, a selfish senator, Hiarbas, a priest, and Batto, a 
tricky merchant, Asdrubal is ambitious to make himself king. He 
has reason to dislike Hamilcar, because the general's daughter, 
Eliza, has rejected his suit in favor of Xantippus, a Spartan com- 
mander in the service of Carthage. A Roman tribune having been 
discovered entering Hamilcar's house, the report spreads among 
the people that Hamilcar and Xantippus have treated with the 
enemy to surrender the city. Hamilcar is arrested and is accused 
of treachery by Asdrubal. Eliza consents to marry Asdrubal in 
order to save her father, but she plans to kill him. Asdrubal wishes 

366Ranke, A History of England, V, 48-51. Maidment and Logan, Works, IV, 126, 
observe this reference. Browning gives a vivid account of the escape of the French fleet 
in Herve Kiel. 

367 Genest, II, 21 pointed this out. 

368 The Gentleman's Journal, November, 1692, p. 21; December, 1692, p. 15. 
869 Ihid., June, 1692, p. 18. 

S70 Ibid., AprU, 1693, II, 131. 



160 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

to get her into his power only that he may violate her and be re- 
venged for her coldness. Xantippus appears opportunely, however, 
and after rescuing Hamilcar, seizes Asdrubal and his followers. 

In the meanwhile Regulus goes into battle in spite of inauspi- 
cious omens, among them the appearance of his dead wife Apamia's 
ghost. Fulvia, his present fiancee, is filled with anxiety for his 
safety. Her fears are justified, for he is taken captive by Xantip- 
pus and promptly clapped into a dungeon by the Carthaginian senate. 
Xantippus is indignant at this treatment of his captive, who refuses 
to treat for peace. At the Spartan's suggestion Regulus is sent to 
the Roman camp as his own ambassador on his pledge to return 
and to suffer death if he fails in his mission. He hastens to the 
Romans and explains the conditions, but bids them fight while he 
goes to death and honor. The army opposes his return with force, 
but he persuades Metellus to tell them that the Carthaginians have 
given him poison. Fulvia makes a frantic effort to detain him, but 
he pleads the honor of his pledge and the glory of Rome, and 
escapes when she swoons at the sight of Apamia's ghost. 

Asdrubal, meanwhile, who has been released from prison and 
invited by the senators to become protector of the commonwealth, 
in order to oppose Xantippus, persuades the cowed and cringing 
Gisgon, Hiarbas, and Batto to recant the testimony they had given 
concerning his kingly ambitions. He seemingly clears himself, but 
after his followers are led to execution, he is seized as a tyrant. 
Regulus returns; and refusing peace, is ordered to be tortured. 
When he learns of this action, Xantippus rebels and joins the at- 
tacking Romans, whom Fulvia is leading. Regulus is found alive 
on the rack, but he soon dies, conscious of Fulvia's love and his 
own great honor. Fulvia goes mad. Xantippus is given leave to 
return to Sparta, and takes Hamilcar and Eliza with him. 

Hitherto, all efforts to discover the source or sources which 
Crowne used for Regulus have been unsuccessful. The editors of 
the Biographia Dramutica stated that the story of Regulus is to be 
found in Livy and Florus;^^^ but, as Genest has pointed out, that 
part of Livy's history which concerned Regulus is lost.^^^ The 
account of Florus, moreover, is brief and gives few details. Maid- 
ment and Logan conclude that "none of the incidents of the tragedy 
have a genuine historical foundation; but they seem entire fictions 
coined by the author. "^^^ They, too, are mistaken. The capture of 

371 Biographica Dratnatica, III, 199. 

372 Genest, II, 21-2. 

373 Works, IV, 127. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 161 

Regulus by the Carthaginians under the leadership of Xantippus 
is unquestionably historical. Indeed, Polybius, who is silent about 
the heroic sacrifice of Regulus, gives a detailed account of the battle. 
Furthermore, that part of the play which is concerned with Regulus 
and Fulvia and the consul's betrayal into the hands of Xantippus 
is based upon a French tragedy by Nicolas Pradon^^* called "Regu- 
lus" and published in 1688. A brief synopsis of Pradon's play will 
reveal the similarity between the two tragedies. 

Regulus, having captured Clypea and reduced three hundred 
other towns, beseiges Carthage. With the Roman army are Metellus, 
the proconsul, and his daughter Fulvie, beloved by Regulus ; also 
Attilius, the young son of Regulus, in charge of Lepide. Mannius, 
the tribune, also loves Fulvie, and hates Regulus out of envy and 
because of an insult he has received. Metellus intrusts Mannius 
with the task of conducting Fulvie and Attilius to Clypea while the 
battle rages, but they refuse to go. Fulvie has forebodings of dis- 
aster and begs Regulus not to leave her. Mannius, meanwhile, turns 
traitor and betrays the Roman army into the hands of Xantipus, 
who prepares a trap and captures Regulus. The news astounds 
Metellus and Priscus, but they endeavor to conceal it from Fulvie. 
Her fears are aroused by their anxious faces, but she can learn only 
that Regulus is not dead. Mannius brings her news of the capture 
and hopes to win her favor ; but she spurns him. A truce is arranged 
by Asdrubal, and Regulus returns on his word of honor to arrange 
a peace or suffer death. He deliberately counsels war, and bidding 
Metellus break the news to Fulvie and Attilius, prepares to return. 
Priscus opposes the patriotic sacrifice of Regulus, and reveals his 
determination to the despairing Fulvie. Lepide, meanwhile, arouses 
the army to oppose his return. Fulvie and Attilius appeal to the 
love which Regulus has for them, and although they almost unman 
him, he is steadfast. Metellus overcomes the opposition of the 
army by pretending that Regulus has been poisoned by Xantipus 
and Asdrubal, and that he will die in any case. He is allowed to 
return, and shortly is exposed on the walls of Carthage and tortured 
to death by Xantipus. Meanwhile the treachery of Mannius is 
revealed, and he is cut to pieces by the army. Young Attilius rushes 

374 Nicolas Pradon (1632-1698) was a little known minor French dramatist of the 
late seventeenth century. Almost nothing is known of his life. No signature or portrait 
of him is extant. BoUeau taxed him with ridiculous ignorance in Epistles VII and X. 
His tragedies are as follows: Pyrame et Thishe (1674), Tamerlan (1675). Phedre et 
Hippolyte (1677), Electre (1677; not printed), Troade (1679), Statira (1679), Tarquin 
(1682), Regulus (Jan. 4, 1688), Germanicus (1694; not printed), Scipion (1697). Pyrame 
and Regulus were his great successes. His tragedies are without exception mediocre. 
Cf. La Grande Encyclopedie, XXVII, 533-4. 



162 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

forth to avenge his father, and Fulvie prepares to die under the walls 
of the city. 

Pradon confesses in the preface to his play that Fulvie is his 
own invention, and that in order to preserve the unities of time and 
place he has altered some of the circumstances of history and placed 
the scene in the Roman camp before Carthage and not in Rome. In 
all of these variations from the classical accounts Crowne has fol- 
lowed his French model.^^® In both plays Fulvia is the daughter of 
Metellus and beloved by Regulus. In both she has presentiments of 
disaster concerning her hero, and refuses his wish that she seek 
safety at Clypea during the battle. After the capture of Regulus, 
Crowne follows his model in keeping the news from Fulvia, and 
again upon the consul's return, in bringing her before him to make 
a final fruitless appeal. Pradon's Fulvie at the end expresses a 
desire to bury herself beneath the walls of Carthage, but Crowne's 
Fulvia leads the army to the rescue of her beloved, and goes mad 
when he expires from his torture before her eyes. The characters 
of Regulus and Metellus the English playwright also borrowed with 
slight variations from his French model. Regulus is still the heroic 
general who will enter battle in spite of unfavorable omens. Upon 
his capture and return he shows the same heroic determinaiton to 
sacrifice himself, and assumes the same attitude towards Fulvia 
and the opposition of the army. As in the French play, Metellus 
upholds Regulus in his patriotic duty, and thwarts the army by a 
trick. The Lepide of Pradon is the tutor of young Attilius, but 
Crowne eliminates the son of Regulus and makes Lepidus do duty 
both for Priscus, as a commander who opposes the consul's sacri- 
fice, and for Lepide as the inspirer of the army's opposition to it.^^® 

The chief variation which Crowne has made from his original 
is found in his treatment of Mannius. In the French play Mannius 
appears as a jealous rival of Regulus for the hand of Fulvie and 
his treachery is motivated by his desire to get rid of his opponent. 
Crowne, however, abandons this love element and introduces the 
treason of Mannius only in a dialogue between the Carthaginian 
characters.^^^ The conflict, which in Pradon's play is in part 

376 Les Oeuvres de Mr. Pradon, Paris, 1688. Regulus, preface pp. 1 and 3. 

376 Although detailed study of Crowne's borrowings is unnecessary to show his use 
of the French play, I subjoin a list of his Roman-camp scenes and the corresponding 
scenes from Pradon which he used. Crowne, Act II, 3 (IV, 155-163) — Pradon, Act 
I, 3: Act II, 1-4. Crowne, Act III, 3 (IV, 174-6)— Pradon, Act III, 1, 2, 4. Crowne, 
Act IV, 4 (IV, 193-97)— Pradon, Act IV, 3, 4, 5, 7. Crowne, Act V, 1 (IV, 197-205)— 
Pradon, Act V, 1, 3, 5, 8. Other scenes of Pradon contain material which Crowne 
utilizes but from these he borrows directly. 

377 Works, IV, 149, 155, 166, 171. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 163 

between the rival suitors for Fulvie, becomes in the English play, 
solely a struggle between love and duty. Other changes of con- 
siderable importance which Crowne makes, are the elimination of 
young Attilius from the plot, and the introduction of the ghost of 
Apamia, the wife of Regulus. The ghost's first appearance is a 
clumsy effort to foreshadow disaster, while her second entrance 
causes Fulvia to swoon and allows Regulus to make a good exit. 

In conformity to the practice of his contemporaries and to the 
demand of his public for dramas filled with action, Crowne does 
not, like Pradon, confine himself to the story of Regulus and Fulvia. 
On the contrary he devotes the larger half of his play to a presenta- 
tion of Carthaginian turmoils connected with the war against the 
Roman consul. Of the characters here presented Xantippus is the 
only one whose part approximates historical fact. A very brief ac- 
count of his services to Carthage may be found in Florus^^^ and 
in Cicero f^^ but a more likely source of Crowne's information is 
the history of Polybius, who gives a somewhat detailed narrative 
of the battle in which Xantippus overcame Regulus. ^^° He also 
mentions the shadowy historical personages, Hasdrubal and Hamil- 
car, who were the unsuccessful leaders of the Carthaginians before 
the arrival of Xantippus. They are not to be identified with the 
more famous Hamilcar-Barca (father of Hannibal) and his son-in- 
law Hasdrubal.^^^ According to Crowne's play, Xantippus returns 
to Sparta with his troops, but not until he has discovered a plot to 
sink him and his soldiers in rotten ships.^^^ Polybius hints at such 
a plot but does not mention it. Appian, however, states that the 
Carthaginians, in order to rob Xantippus of the credit for victory 
over Regulus, pretended to honor him with gifts and sent galleys 
to convey him back to Lacedaemonia with instructions to throw him 
overboard. The Carthaginians obeyed their orders. ^^^ This may 
have given Crowne his suggestion for the "rotten ships". 

The under-plot of the English Regulus, so far as it concerns 
the rivalry of Asdrubal and Xantippus for the hand of Eliza, Hamil- 
car's daughter, and the aspirations of Asdrubal to make himself king 
in response to the solicitation of Gisgon, Hiarbas, and Batto, seems 
to be entirely Crowne's own invention. There are hints that the 

378 L. Annaeus Florus, Epitome Rerum Romanarum, Lib. II, cap. 2. 

379 Cicero, De Officiis, iii, 26-27. 

380 Polybius, Historiae, Lib. I, cap. 29-36. 

381 It is possible, however, that the relation between this pair suggested to Crowne 
his plot of Asdrubal and Xantippus as rivals for the hand of Eliza. 

382 Works, IV, 219. 
388 Appian, Punica, 4. 



164 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

plottings of Asdrubal and his followers were intended to suggest 
vaguely to the English audience their own political situation in 1692. 
This is especially true of the character of Hiarbas, the priest, who 
says on one occasion, 

''The Romans are a godly nation, 
And ours a vile; I, and more godly men 
Have a design, by help of the good Romans, 
To give bad Carthage a religious master. 
That is this Prince. Though he was wild of late. 
He's now reform'd, and is a heavenly man. 
Help you to make him King, when he is King 
You may be sure of a very rich reward."^®* 
The tragedy of Regulus, unlike other plays of Crowne, contains 
an element of comedy in the prose scenes between Gisgon, Hiarbas, 
Batto, and Asdrubal. In this respect one may see, perhaps, the 
influence of Elizabethan drama. 

I see no reason to dissent from Genest's critical opinion of 
the drama. He found it an ''indifferent tragedy" with a story 
"barren of incident and not well calculated for the stage. "^^^ The 
mediocrity of Pradon's play is carried over into the English drama, 
and the sub-plot which Crowne invented is lacking in vital interest. 
Regulus and Xantippus are drawn with heroical traits, but the 
playwright fails to make his audience feel their emotional intensity. 
He is more at home in the comic prose scenes where he holds a rich 
selfish senator, a luxury-loving priest and an unscrupulous merchant 
up to ridicule. One is not surprised that the English public of 1692 
did not receive the play enthusiastically. 

THE MARRIED BEAU 

After the failure of Regulus, Crowne turned again to comedy. 
He seems to have been engaged on the composition of his next play, 
The Married Beau, throughout 1693, for in November of that year 
The Gentleman's Journal in discussing the productions promised for 
that theatrical season says, "We are also to have ... a Comedy 
by Mr. Crown."^^^ This must refer to The Married Beau. The 
play was not acted, however, for several months. In the May 
number for 1694 the same periodical makes the following announce- 
ment: "We have had two new Comedies since my last; the first 

384 Works, IV, 154. 

386 Genest, II, 20-22. 

386 The Gentleman's Journal, November 1693, II, 374. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 165 

called Have at all, or the Midnight Adventures, by Mr. Joseph 
Williams ; the other call'd The Married beau, or the curious Im- 
pertinent, by Mr. Crown, already acted many times. "^®^ Inasmuch 
as each number of this miscellany appeared, according to the testi- 
mony of the editor, at the beginning of the following month,^®* we 
may conclude that The Married Beau was first acted early in May, 
1694. It seems to have been well received, since Motteux remarks 
that it had already been "acted many times" before his miscellany 
went to press. Henry Purcell, a noted composer of the time, added 
his skill to that of the dramatist by contributing an overture and 
eight tunes. ^^^ The play was published in the Trinity term 1694.^^^ 

The plot of The Married Beau is as follows : Mr. Lovely, a 
newly married beau, considers himself very handsome and feeds 
upon flattery. He desires to be admired by all women and especially 
by his wife, and to test her regard for him he requests Mr. Polidor, 
his best friend, to attempt her virtue. Polidor is angered by the 
foolish request and complies with it, but with some compunctions, 
for he fears that Camilla, whom he loves, will hear of it and reject 
him. Lovely tells his wife that he has to sup at court and may 
be gone for a week on a country trip ; and leaves her alone with 
Polidor, in spite of the latter's protests. At the first opportune 
moment Polidor solicits Mrs. Lovely, but she spurns him and 
reproves her gentlewoman for leaving her alone. Camilla comes 
to visit Mrs. Lovely just as she is about to send for her. She 
reveals Polidor's baseness, and Camilla checks her growing regard 
for him. Polidor, inflamed by Mrs. Lovely's beauty, finds her 
alone in Camilla's absence; and overcoming her weakening resist- 
ance, leads her off to a bed-chamber. Lionell, the maid, sees the 
exit and resolves to profit by it, but she inadvertently reveals her 
secret to the returning Camilla. Mrs. Lovely denies her guilt at 
first, but breaks down under Camilla's threats and becomes penitent. 

Lovely, meantime, has learned by a letter from his wife of 
Polidor's first solicitation, and is satisfied with her behavior. He 
even upbraids Polidor with his failure. Later Lovely leaves on an 
errand for Camilla; and she, pretending to depart, spies upon 
Polidor as he again attempts to force Mrs. Lovely. Camilla appears 
opportunely and bitterly upbraids Polidor. Lionell reveals her 

387 Ibid., May, 1694, III, 134. 

388 Ibid., June, 1693, II, 179. 

389 Charles Burney, A General History of Music, III, 478-79. 

390 Arber, Term Catalogue, II, 511. 



166 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

knowledge to Mrs. Lovely and forces her mistress to conceal Thorne- 
back, her lover, in her own closet. His presence is discovered by 
Polidor, who thinks Mrs. Lovely false to him, and decides to betray 
her to her husband. This he does, but when Lovely first swears to 
murder her and later to leave her forever, Polidor repents and 
devises a scheme to reassure him. He pretends to desire an oppor- 
tunity to cuckold his foolish friend. Lovely consents but will wit- 
ness the deed. Meanwhile, the repentant Polidor informs Mrs. 
Lovely through Lionell of his scheme to deceive Lovely into thinking 
her chaste. Thus by prearrangement Polidor solicits Mrs. Lovely 
and she indignantly spurns him, while her husband secretly looks 
on with great satisfaction. Lovely is so grateful that he promises 
to assist Polidor in winning back the affection of Camilla. That 
saintly lady coldy rejects Polidor until he pleads that only by marry- 
ing him can she reform him. 

An under-plot concerns the successful efforts of Lionell, Mrs. 
Lovely's maid, to entice Thorneback, an elderly spark, into the en- 
tanglements of matrimony. It also contains the attempts of the 
hesitant young Sir John Shittlecock to court Mrs. Lovely, Camilla, 
Lionell, and Cecilia in turn. He finally succeeds in winning Mrs. 
Lovely's foolish young sister. 

Crowne made no effort to conceal the source of his plot; on 
the contrary he indicated it by his secondary title. The Curious Im- 
pertinent. This famous novel from Don Quixote had already been 
several times utilized in the course of the seventeenth century.^®^ 
Even before the publication of Thomas Shelton's English translation 
in 1612, an unknown playwright had used the Spanish story for the 
minor plot of a play now known as The Second Maiden's Tragedy 
(licensed 1611). This subordinate plot varies little from El Curioso 
Impertinente except in the catastrophe. ^^^ Shortly after,^®^ the 
same story was utilized by Nathaniel Field for the sub-plot of 

391 E. Koppel, Don Quixote, Sancho Panza und Dulcenea in der englischen Literatur 
bis zur Restauration, Herrigs Archiv, CI, 98, says that there were six or seven plays 
with the Curious-Impertinent motive in the English drama of the seventeenth century. 

392 A. S. W. Rosenbach, The Curious-Impertinent in English Dramatic Literature 
before Shelton's Translation of Don Quixote, Modern Language Notes, XVII, 357-67. The 
Second Maiden's Tragedy may be found in Dodsley's Old English Plays, 4th ed., X. 
381-468. 

393 A. W. Ward, History of English Dramatic Literature, II, 683 suggests that 
Beaumont and Fletcher's The Coxcomb (performed 1612) is indebted for one of its plots 
to the Curious-Impertinent story, but I agree with Rosenbach (see note 392 above) that had 
Beaumont and Fletcher used Cervantes' story, they would have borrowed more directly 
from it. It has also been suggested that Robert Davenport's The City Night-Cap (1624) 
is from the Spanish story, but A. H. BuUen, The Works of Robt. Davenport, London, 
1890, pp. xii, 94 note, has proved that he was indebted to Robt. Greene's Philomela (1592). 
In the Restoration period Mrs. Behn's The Amorous Prince (1671) has been thought to 
owe something to Cervantes, but Summers, The Works of Aphra Behn, IV, 119-20 has 
pointed out that Mrs. Behn has borrowed rather from Davenport's play. ' 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 167 

Amends for Ladies (published 1618, but acted earlier).^®* Among 
the Restoration plays before the time of Crowne's Married Beau, 
Thomas Southerne's The Disappointment, or The Mother in Fashion 
(1684) makes use of Cervantes' novel.^^^ 

Crowne was not indebted to any of these dramatizations of 
El Curioso Impertinente, but w^ent directly to the original. Whether 
he read the Spanish text or Shelton's translation, it is impossible to 
determine, but his adaptation of Moreto's No Puede Ser proves 
that he was not ignorant of the language. Let us now examine his 
use of his source.^^^ 

In its external aspects the plot of The Married Beau follows 
that of Cervantes' novel rather closely. "The Two Friends" of 
the Spanish story, Anselmo and Lothario, correspond to Lovely 
and Polidor. Like Anselmo, Lovely is recently and happily married, 
and desires to test his wife by means of his best friend. Anselmo 
attributes his motive to an irrational disease of which he can be 
cured only by satisfying himself of the unchanging virtue of his 
wife Camilla. Here Crowne introduces his first important change 
by making Lovely desire the trial merely to satisfy his own vanity. 
The attitude of Lothario and Polidor to the proposal is also differ- 
ent. The former seeks to dissuade his friend by lengthy arguments, 
and undertakes the disagreeable task only when Anselmo determines 
to seek another for the office unless he consents. Polidor is an- 
noyed by Lovely's foolish proposal, and suspecting a trick, angrily 
complies.^^^ There is a further difference between Polidor and Loth- 
ario. The latter's friendship for Anselmo is true, but Polidor rec- 
ognizes in Lovely his real foppish, affected character, and is dis- 
gusted. He is therefore at no such pains as Lothario to deter his 
friend from his hazardous plan. The first efforts of Lothario to 
deceive Anselmo without complying are omitted by Crowne. 

In the seduction scenes Crowne again follows his original rather 
closely. Polidor 's first attempt to solicit Mrs. Lovely meets with 
the same rebuff as Lothario's effort to seduce Camilla. In each 
case the wife has recourse to the presence of her waiting woman to 
protect her, and each addresses a letter to her absent husband comr- 
plaining of her treatment.^^® Polidor's second and successful at- 
tempt on Mrs. Lovely's virtue follows closely Lothario's conquest of 

394 Natl. Field, Amends for Ladies, Dodsley, XI, 87-172. 
396 The Works of Thomas Southerne, London, 1713, 73-152. 

396 My account follows that of Grosse, pp. 74-79, in the main, 

397 Works, rV, 247— Z?on Quixote, Bk. IV, ch. 6, Shelton's translation, London, 
1908, pp. 326-27. 

398 Works, rV, 264-67— Don Quixote. Bk. IV, ch. 6, I, 332-34. 



168 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

the yielding Camilla. ^^^ In each case the seducer is inflamed by the 
beauty of the wife and loses the restraint which hitherto has marked 
his actions. In each, likewise, the waiting-woman becomes cognizant 
of the fall of her mistress. At this point Crowne adds a new ele- 
ment by letting the saintly Camilla into the secret for the purpose of 
reforming the fallen wife. 

The return of Lovely, like that of Anselmo, is marked by the 
concealment of the wife's fall; but from this point Crowne takes 
more freedom with his material. Henceforth there is a divergence 
between the actions of the wife Camilla, and those of Mrs. Lovely. 
Mrs. Lovely's saintly friend saves her from being overcome a second 
time, and thereafter she sins no more. Anselmo's wife, however, 
continues her illicit relations with Lothario. Lionell now for the 
first time begins to play the role of Leonila, and making capital of 
her secret knowledge of Mrs. Lovely's guilt, imposes on her mistress 
the task of concealing Thorneback in her closet. In the resulting 
complication Crowne again follows Cervantes. Polidor, discover- 
ing Thorneback, thinks Mrs. Lovely false to him, just as Lothario, 
seeing Leonela's lover escaping from an upper chamber window, sus- 
pects Camilla. The upshot is the same in both cases. Polidor, like 
Lothario, tells the husband that his wife is not all that she should 
be, and proposes a demonstration, with the husband as a secret wit- 
ness.*°^ Both Polidor and Lothario soon regret their hasty dis- 
closures and acquaint the wives with what they have done. There 
is considerable variation in what immediately follows. In Crowne's 
play the repentant Polidor gives the reformed Mrs. Lovely an op- 
portunity to deceive her husband and regain his affection. In Cer- 
vantes' story, on the other hand, Camilla's resourcefulness is respon- 
sible for the elaborate deception in which she threatens to kill Loth- 
ario and then herself, and vindicates her honor to the complete sat- 
isfaction of the eavesdropping Anselmo.^"^ The motive of Camilla 
and Lothario is to make their illicit relations more secure, while 
Crowne, on the contrary, utilizes the scene to provide a denouement 
for a plot which logically should lead to a catastrophe, as it does in 
the Spanish novel. 

Although, as we have just seen, Crowne follows the Spanish 
plot rather closely except for his alteration of the catastrophe, this 
is far from being the case with respect to the characters. The ex- 

309 Works, IV, 285-89— Don Quixote, Bk. IV, ch. 6, I, 335-36. 

400 Works, IV, 312-17.— Don Quixote, Bk. IV, ch. 7, pp. 342-44. 

401 Works, IV, 323-24.— Don Quixote, Bk. IV, ch. 7, pp. 345-355. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 169 

ternal functions of Anselmo, Lothario, Camilla, and Leonila are 
taken over by Mr. Lovely, Polidor, Mrs. Lovely, and Lionell, but 
beyond this the differences are more striking than the similarities. 
Anselmo is a sincere but misguided person. Lovely on the other 
hand is an affected, foppish beau of the period. Equally noteworthy 
is the contrast between Camilla and Mrs. Lovely. The former be- 
comes a victim in the first instance not through any defect in her 
character, but because of the novelty of the circumstances connected 
with the seduction. The latter, however, is something of a coquette 
and courts admiration too near the danger line. Yet she does not 
succumb without a struggle and is genuinely repentant. Polidor is 
closer to Lothario than Lovely or his wife to their prototypes. Loth- 
ario, however, is the nobler character, more true to himself and to 
his friend. Polidor is more like the Restoration comedy type which 
has its fling throughout the play and reforms in the last act. Lionell 
is much more vivacious and aggressive than the Leonila of Cervan- 
tes. In these respects she has taken on English characteristics. 

To the four basic characters which the plot of Cervantes' story 
requires, Crowne joined a fifth, the virtuous and saintly maiden of 
small fortune, Camilla, who is made necessary by the transforma- 
tion of Polidor into a respectable lover. Grosse compares her with 
Christina, heroine of The Countrey Wit, who also meets with infidel- 
ity in her lover, and who contrasts with the worldly, pleasure-seek- 
ing type of Restoration woman.*^^ This type of virtuous young lady 
is not uncommon, however, in the comedies of the period. The 
minor plot of the play is the creation of Crowne except for the inci- 
dent in which Thorneback, Lionell's lover, is introduced into Mrs. 
Lovely's closet to arouse Polidor's jealousy and suspicion. The 
characters of Thorneback, Shittlecock, and Cecilia are original with 
the English playwright. 

Finally, there is one slight borrowing from Moliere. The scene 
in which Thorneback courts Mrs. Lovely by singing a song of his 
own making and by dancing for her, to the envy of Shittlecock, is 
reminiscent of the scene in Les Precieuses Ridicules in which Mas- 
carille sings "Au Voleur" to Cathos and Magdelon.*^^ Crowne had 
already imitated this scene more closely in Sir Courtly Nice.^^'^ 

The Married Beau is noteworthy among Crowne's plays as his 
last extant comedy, and as the play in which in some respects, he 

402 Grosse, p. 80. 

403 Works, IV, 272-74. — Moliere, Les Precieuses Ridicules, sc. IX. 

404 Works, III, 340-42. 



170 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

shows himself at his best. In his transformation of Anselmo, Cam- 
illa, and Lothario into Lovely, Mrs. Lovely, and Polidor, the play- 
wright created real English characters with thoroughly individual- 
ized traits. The motivation for the testing of the wife, which is 
lacking in Cervantes' story, Crowne provides in the vanity of Lovely. 
If there is less of a struggle in the mind of Polidor between his duty 
and his pleasure than in that of Lothario, it is because the former 
has become a genuine Restoration type with only a weak conscience 
in his make-up. On the other hand Mrs. Lovely reveals a greater 
inner struggle than is the case with Cervantes' Camilla. The char- 
acter of Lionell is also an advance over the Leonila of the original. 
Her lover, who is a shadowy personage in the Curious-Impertinent, 
Crowne recreates as the middle-aged Squire Thorneback, a true 
Restoration social product. One feels that Crowne had little sym- 
pathy for his saintly Camilla, whom he added as a reforming agency. 
She is less interesting and less clearly developed than Mrs. Lovely. 
Of the other characters which Crowne created, Shittlecock, the 
amorous young knight, and Cecilia, Mrs. Lovely's foolish young 
sister, are on a distinctly lower plane. Shittlecock is a purely farcical 
type. His lack of determination and his amorous disposition are 
both displayed with great extravagance. Cecilia is the least individ- 
ualized of all the characters in the play. 

The use of blank verse in The Married Beau is a departure 
from the current practice in realistic comedy, which since the time of 
Etherege's She Would if She Could had been almost exclusively in 
prose. The easy, flowing blank verse which Crowne used, with its 
large number of feminine endings, probably harks back, as Dr. Ward 
has suggested,**^^ to the comedies of Fletcher and Shirley; but it is 
not unique even in the realistic comedy of the Restoration period. 
Mrs. Behn in The City Heiress (1682) wrote a considerable part 
of her play in the same fluent form.*°® Without belittling the ex- 
cellence of Crowne's blank verse in The Married Beau, I cannot 
agree with Schlegel,"*^^ to whose opinion Grosse subscribes,*^® that 
the reaHstic prose comedies lacked grace of form. So far from 
being the case, that same sparkling prose dialogue is one of the 
recognized excellencies of the plays of Etherege and Congreve. 

Crowne is at some pains to defend the morality of his drama 

405 A. W. Ward, op. cit., Ill, 407. 

406 The Works of Aphra Behn, II. 

407 A. W. Schlegel, Vorlesungen uber dramatische Kunst und Litteratur, Sammtliche 
Werke, Leipzig, 1846, VI, 362-3. 

408 Grosse, p. 83. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 171 

in his epistle to the reader. *ln this play," he says, "a lady's virtue 
is vanish'd by temptation, and she is led out to be debauch'd, and, 
not long after, returns and confesses her sin: This offends some 
ladies, but 'tis hard to know which offends them, the sin or the con- 
fession, the latter example perhaps they like worst. If the sin be 
the offence, the ladies have led my muse astray, by going so often 
to see the same assaults and conquests more grossly represented in 
other plays." He then resorts to Scripture for a defence of his 
adultress.*"^ I agree with Grosse that the seduction of Mrs. Lovely 
does not stamp the play as immoral ; she is the victim of the novelty 
of circumstances. And yet the denouement does not weigh well in 
the scale of morality. The deception of Lovely, the reinstatement 
of Mrs. Lovely into her former place in his affections, and the 
reformation of Polidor, do not constitute the logical consequences 
which should grow out of the action of the play. 

CALIGULA 

After the success of The Married Beau several years elapsed 
before Crowne again came forward with a new play. The reason 
for his long silence he explains in his epistle to the reader : 'T have 
for some few years been disorder'd with a distemper which seated 
itself in my head, threatned me with epilepsy, and frequently took 
from m'e not only all sense, but almost all signs of life, and in my 
intervals, I wrote this play."*^*' The rimed tragedy of Caligula, 
Crowne's last extant drama, was produced in all likelihood about 
the middle of March, 1698, since in The Post Boy for April 2nd to 
5th of that year appears the following advertisement: ''This Day is 
published the last new Tragedy, called Caligula, Emperor of Rome, 
as it is Acted at the Theatre Royal in Drury Lane."*^^ Play-books 
were generally published at this time within a fortnight after the 
premiere of the play.^^^ We may infer that Caligula was not very 
successful from the fact that its author feels called upon to defend it. 
He says, to be sure, that many people of quality were pleased, but 
if the play had been really popular, we may feel sure that he would 
have said so. 

409 Works, IV, 238. 

410 Works, IV, 352. 

411 The Post Boy for April 2-5, 1698. Arber, Term Catalogue, III, 65, states that 
it was published in the Easter term, 1698. Genest, II, 143, says the play seems to have 
been published without the dramatis personae, but as Maidment and Logan have pointed 
out, this is a mistake. The quarto in the Harvard College Library which I have used 
certainly contains a list of characters and actors. 

412 George Farquhar, edited by Wm. Archer, Mermaid' ed., introd. p. 5, note. 



172 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

The plot of CaUgula may be stated briefly as follows : Caligula, 
the Roman emperor, considers himself a god, and regards only his 
own glory and pleasure. To this end he takes to himself the honors 
which his generals win in the field, and keeps the senate servile in 
Rome by a tyrannical use of his power over life and death. In his 
personal behavior he is luxurious in the extreme, prostituting what- 
ever beauty attracts his eye and dishonoring even his own sisters. 
His empress, the wanton Cesonia, loves him to distraction, and uses 
all her arts to keep him to herself. Among his generals Vitellius 
is basely subservient, while Valerius is proud and honorable; and 
though loyal, dares to oppose Caligula's tyrannical actions. Cassius, 
the tribune, a worthy man with a failing for women, is made the in- 
strument of Caligula's oppressions, and dares to murmur. For this 
he is imprisoned. 

The brave Valerius has a beautiful wife, Julia, whom he has 
kept at his country estate secluded from the lust of Caligula; but 
disliking the solitude, she disobeys his orders and comes to Rome. 
He impresses her with the licentious nature of Caligula, and con- 
jures her to return ; but ere she can obey, Caesar spies her and bids 
Vitellius seize her and bring her to him. In spite of her prayers 
he carries her off to ravish her. Cesonia, fresh from the bath, pre- 
pares to entertain Caligula, but rages when she learns of another 
woman. Caesar appeases her. Julia returns with her shame to Val- 
erius, who swears revenge. The violated wifie poisons herself and 
dies in her husband's embrace. 

Meanwhile Caligula condemns the Jews to die for failure to 
worship him, and seizes old Pastor as hostage for his son Lepidus, 
who has defied custom and married Salome, a Jewess and daughter 
of Philo. Lepidus gives himself up to save his father. But fore- 
shadowings of Caligula's death are at hand. He frees the imprisoned 
Cassius and orders him to work wholesale executions to terrify 
upstart rebellion. Instead, Cassius and his followers fall upon Cali- 
gula and kill him. Valerius arrives with soldiers for the same pur- 
pose, and Caesar dies at his feet. The imprisoned Jews are freed, 
and Lepidus is reunited to Salome. Valerius intends to restore the 
senate to its rights, and to retire to mourn for Julia. 

Concerning the sources of Caligula the editors of the Biographia 
Dramatica state that the plot is taken from Suetonius' life of Cali- 
gula.'*^^ In part they are correct. Maidment and Logan, following 

418 Biographia Dramatica, II, 77. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 173 

their lead, recognized the borrowings from Suetonius, but added 
that "Valerius Asiaticus, his wife Julia, Philo, Pastor, Lepidus, and 
Salome are indebted to Crowne for their ephemeral existence."*^* 
Of the characters here listed Philo was in fact a noted Jewish phil- 
osopher, Valerius Asiaticus was twice a Roman consul, and his wife 
— whatever her name — was a victim of Caligula's lust. Crowne 
himself says, "I have put little more into the play than what I have 
found taken out of history. All of the characters and most of the 
events in the play I have taken out of history. "^^^ Although the 
veracity of our author's prefatorial statements is sometim.es open to 
question, in this instance he was nearer the truth than has been sus- 
pected. A careful search indicates that Salome, Pastor, and Lepidus 
are the only fictitious characters among the persons represented. 
The chief source of Crowne's material so far as it concerns 
Caligula and his wife Cesonia is Suetonius' life of Caligula.*^^ Here 
the dramatist met with a detailed portrayal of the young emperor 
who violated his own sister and the wives of many of the principal 
citizens of Rome, and who was constant only to Cesonia, a woman 
in the youthful bloom of life, but lascivious and of insatiable lust. 
Here also Crowne found mention of Caligula's scattering money 
among the plebeians, of his preparations for a military triumph that 
was barren of achievement, and of his complaints against the senate 
for not offering him that honor, after he had warned them that he 
was above their honoring. In Suetonius's account, moreover, ap- 
pear the signs presaging Caligula's death, and the setting of a thea- 
trical spectacle which the dramatist utilized in the play. The role 
of Cassius Chaerea is drawn from this source also. According to 
Suetonius Caligula flouted Cassius as a wanton and effiminate per- 
son, and when the latter came to him for a watchword, was accus- 
tomed to give him Triapus' in contempt. Yet Cassius it was who 
led the conspirators against him. According to the Latin historian, 
Caesonia was killed when Caligula was murdered, but Crowne saw 
fit to vary from his source here.**^" The contemptible character of 
Vitellius, whose adultation of Caligula Crowne had occasion to de- 
fend on historical grounds in his epistl-e to the reader,"^^® is taken 
from Suetonius' life of the emperor Aulus Vitellius.*^® As Crowne 

414 Maidment and Logan, Works, IV, 340. 

415 Works, IV, 351-52. 

416 C. Suetonius, Duodecim Caesares, edited by C. B. Hase, Paris, 1828, II, 1-74. 

417 The chapters of Suetonius' Caligula which provided Crowne with details for his 
play are as follows: 22, 24-26, 30, 36-37, 43-50, 54, 56-59. 

418 Works, IV, 352. 

419 Suetonius, Duodecim Caesares, Aulus Vitellius, §2. 



174 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

says, the episode in which VitelHus begs a sHpper of Cesonia, which 
he kisses and carries in his bosom/^^ is historical except that the 
compliment was paid to Messalina, the wife of the emperor Claudius. 
Crowne may be indebted likewise to Dio Cassius's account of Vitel- 
lius.*^^ According to this author Vitellius escaped death by falling 
at Caligula's feet where he showed great adulation, calling him divine 
and worshipping him. By this he won the emperor's good will and 
later surpassed all the others in servile flattery. To Suetonius 
Crowne is indebted for one other character, Annius Minutianus, "a 
noble Roman, married to one of the emperor's sisters." Annius is a 
minor character, but be has a grievance. After having married Cali- 
gula's sister, he is forced to witness her violation by the brother on 
the wedding night. *^^ Such was the fate of Cassius Longinus who 
married Caligula's sister Drusilla.*^^ 

The slight plot of Caligula is concerned principally with the re- 
lations between Valerius Asiaticus and the emperor, and the latter's 
violation of Julia, the wife of Valerius. Suetonius is completely 
silent concerning Valerius, but Dio Cassius records that after the 
murder of Caligula when the pretorian guard was in confusion, he 
mounted to a conspicuous place and cried out, "I only wish / had 
killed him!"*^* Valerius was then an ex-consul. Crowne may well 
have seen this and wondered at the reason lying behind the remark. 
Seneca in his De Constantia supplies the answer :^^^ 

"Amongst his [Caligula's] especiall friends, was Valerius Asiat- 
icus, a man of a fierce mind who could scarcely digest those 
contumelies that were offred to a stranger. To this man did 
he object at a banquet, and afterwards in a loude voice in an 
open assembly, the motions and fashions of his wife at such 
times as he accompanied and lay with her. Good gods ! that the 
husband should hear this, and the Prince should know it, and 
that liberty of speech was so unbridled that he should discover, 
(I say not one that had been consull, I say not to his friend, 
but to her own husband) the adulteries of his wife and how 
her lusts were fashioned."^-^ 
We cannot be sure that this is the suggestion from which Crowne 
developed his Valerius, but it might well have been his starting 
point. Crowne's Julia does not seem to correspond to the violated 

420 Works, IV, 366. 

421 Dio Cassius, Historiae Romanae, Lib. 59, §27. 

422 Works, IV, 362. 

423 Suetonius, Caligula, §24. 

424 Dio Cassius, Ibid., Lib. 59, §30. 

425 Seneca, De Constantia, 18. 

426 The translations here quoted is that of Thomas Lodge, The Works of Lucius 
Annaeus Seneca, London, 1620, pp. 672-73. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 175 

wife of Valerius described above. On the other hand, there is a 
similarity between the fate of Julia and that of Lollia Paulina, con- 
cerning whom Suetonius writes : "As touching Lollia Paulina mar- 
ried already to C. Memmius, a man of Consular degree and ruler 
of Armies ; uppon mention made of her Grandmother as the most 
beautifull lady in her time, he [Caligula] all of a suddaine sent and 
called her home out .of the Province and taking her perforce from 
her husband, wedded her and shortly turned her away."*^^ On the 
whole I venture to suggest that it was on the basis of Seneca's Val- 
erius and Suetonius's Lollia Paulina that Crowne constructed his 
plot of Caligula, Julia, and Valerius. 

The role of the philosopher Philo, as an ambassador from the 
Alexandrian Jews to Caligula to complain of injuries and to protest 
against being forced to worship his images, is historical, and is drawn 
from Philo's own narrative.*^^ Philo dwells upon Caligula's assump- 
tion first of the attributes of demigods, and then of the superior 
deities,*^^ describes the outrages against the Alexandrian Jews, and 
gives an account of the embassage to Caligula, of which he was the 
central figure.*^° Crowne's representation of Philo's audience with 
this emperor is manifestly borrowed from Philo's account. The 
Jews in Philo's narrative maintain that they have sacrifices to Caesar, 
just as Crowne's Philo does. Both in Philo and in the play Caligula 
is more interested in his building proj^ects than in the petition. Ac- 
cording to Philo Caius commanded windows to be filled with trans- 
parent pebbles like crystals. Crowne's Caligula says to Vitellius, 
"There Pll have windows of transparent stone 
Which shall the fury of the sun allay."*^^ 
The historical Caligula dismissed the Jews because he considered 
them unfortunate and foolish but not wicked. Crowne's emperor, on 
the contrary, insists that they worship him, and they are much re- 
lieved by his sudden taking-off . • 

Pastor, Lepidus, and Salome seem to be fictitious personages 
created by Crowne for the purpose of a minor love plot. 

427 Suetonius, Caligula, §25. The translation here used is that of Philemon Holland, 
1606, reprinted London, 1899, in no. XXII of the Tudor Translations. 

428 The Works of Philo Judaeus, translated by C. D. Yonge, IV, 99-108, A treatise 
on the virtues and on the office of ambassadors. Addressed to Caius. It is possible 
that Crowne had a copy of Philo's works in Greek before him, but it is as likely that 
he used the 1676 edition of the works of Josephus in English, which contains "Also the 
Embassy of Philo Judaeus to the Emperor Caius Caligula, never translated before," as 
the title-page states. This work is not accessible to me, but it doubtless contains the 
same material which Sir Roger L'Estrange appended to his translation of Josephus, 1702, 
1725. 

429 Cf. Works, IV, 378-79. 

430 Cf. Works, TV, 394-97. 

431 Works, IV, 414-16.— Philo's treatise, §45. 



176 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

In outward form, Caligula is a curious reversion to the rimed 
heroic play, the vogue of which had ended twenty years before ; but 
as a matter of fact, as Mr. George B. Button has pointed out, it is 
not an heroic drama in spite of its couplets.*^^ It still remains a 
mystery why Crowne should choose to write in couplets, since he 
must have been conscious that he was more at home in blank verse. 
In any case we must consider his choice ill-advised, since his coup- 
lets in this play are not superior to his previous efforts in this med- 
ium. In spirit and subject matter Caligula is akin to the Fletcherian 
type of tragedy, and is especially reminiscent of Valentinian. In 
its observation of the unities and in general structure, however, it 
is much more "classical" than Regulus, which, as we have seen, 
admits semi-comic characters in a prose under-plot and thus is rem- 
iniscent of the Elizabethan practice. From the standpoint of plot 
CaUgula is, as Crowne himself admits, deficient. The first three acts 
are almost barren of action, and while they reveal Caligula in such 
a light that we are prepared for the violation of Julia — the central 
action of the play — they have nothing to make them intrinsically in- 
teresting. Historically Crowne was justified in having Cassius kill 
the emperor, but from the point of view of dramatic effect, one 
readily agrees with Maidment and Logan that it would have been 
better if Valerius had done the deed in revenge for the violation of 
his wife. The dialogue has frequently the same argumentative tone 
which is objectionable in Dryden's heroic plays. 

Among the dramatis personae, Caligula, the monster of vicious 
appetites, is clearly portrayed. Crowne did little more, however, 
than to adopt the characteristics which he found in his sources. The 
Empress Cesonia is depicted as a voluptuous, passionate woman, 
but appears in a more favorable light than in Suetonius. The trick 
of character-contrast which Crowne had learned from Moliere, he 
employs with good effect in this play. The upright, valiant Valerius, 
with his record of military achievements, contrasts with the emperor, 
who blusters about triumphs but deserves none. Again, the inde- 
pendent, critical attitude which Valerius assumes is placed in op- 
position to the debasing adulation of Vitellius. Cesonia and Julia 
are also clearly distinguished; the one is wanton, while the other is 
so chaste that she suffers death to remove her shame. 



432 Geo. B. Button, Theory and Practice in English Tragedy 1650-1700, Englische 
Studien, Band XLIX, 1916, p. 212. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 177 

- JUSTICE BUSY 

Crowne's last play was a comedy entitled Justice Busy, or The 
Gentleman Quack. Of all his dramatic productions it alone was 
never printed. Our only real source of information concerning it 
is Downes, who lists it among the principal new plays given from 
1695 until 1704 in the following words : ''Justice Busy, a Comedy 
wrote by Mr. Crown; 'twas well Acted, yet prov'd not a living 
Play : However Mrs. Bracegirdle, by a Potent and Magnetick Charm 
in performing a Song in't, caused the Stones of the Streets to fly 
in the Men's Facesf'^^^ HalHwell-Phillipps states that the songs 
introduced into it were published separately with the music, and it 
is likely that this pubHcation is the source of his knowledge that the 
secondary title is The Gentleman Quack.^^^ The play was performed 
at the Little Lincoln's-Inn-Fields theatre, whither Betterton, Mrs. 
Barry, and Mrs. Bracegirdle had gone after their disagreement with 
the united company at Drury Lane. Halliwell-Phillipps is of the 
opinion that Justice Busy was acted in 1699, but from an examina- 
tion of the list of new plays which Downes gives from 1695 until 
1704, I am inclined to think that 1700 is a more likely date. My 
reason is this. In the eighteen plays which Downes lists, there is 
an apparent attempt to indicate a rough chronological sequence.*^^ 
Among the first nine there are several exceptions to this order, but 
among the last nine, if we include Justice Busy, the chronological 
sequence is maintained. The play immediately preceding Crowne's 
comedy in the list is Southerne's Fate of Capua, produced in 1700, 
and the two plays immediately following (Congreve's Way of the 
World and Rowe's Ambitious Stepmother) were both played in that 
same year. For this reason it seems to me that the slight evidence 
which we have points to 1700 as the date of the play. 

433 Roscius Anglicanus, p. 45. 

434 Halliwell, A Dictionary of Old English Plays, p. 136. 

435 I have used Genest's dates in the mam in checking up this list. 



178 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 



CHAPTER III 



CRITICAL SUMMARY 



I. THE TRAGEDIES 



The historians of English literature have usually classified John 
Crowne as a writer of dull tragedies, and it is significant that he 
gained his first success as a playwright in heroic drama. When he 
began to write for the theatre, Dryden's Conquest of Granada (1669- 
70) had just been greeted with wild applause, and Settle's Empress 
of Morocco (1669) had been acted before the king at Whitehall 
and was about to be played on the public stage. It was natural, 
therefore, that Crowne should turn to the heroic drama for one of 
his first efforts, The History of Charles the Eighth of France 
(1671). Here he allowed free play to the romantic tendencies which 
he had shown in Pandion and Aniphigeneia and Juliana. Thus he 
was able to make heroic characters out of such ordinary historical 
figures as Charles VIII and young King Ferdinand of Naples. In 
common with their heroic brethren, they have exaggerated ideas of 
conduct and artificially stimulated emotions ; and like Almanzor, they 
unpack their hearts in words. The heroines, Julia and Cornelia, 
whose love the young kings seek, are typical heroic women, mere 
stage puppets, which the playwright uses as occasion demands. The 
background of the action is made up of the customary scenes of 
war and conquest. Charles the Eighth was probably acted very 
shortly before the appearance of The Rehearsal in December, 1671, 
but Crowne was too much a new-comer in the theatre to receive 
attention from the satirists. Yet in his dedication to the play (pub- 
lished in 1672) he says, "The enemies which it has already met with 
have been fewer than a play in verse (and an ill one too) could 
expect; considering how many there are, that exclaim against rhyme, 
though never so well writ."^ Although the couplets in Crowne's 
first heroic play are as good as Settle's in The Empress of Morocco, 
they are of a very mediocre quality. 

Three years later, in 1675, Crowne himself joined with other 
writers of the day in satirizing the heroic drama. In an entertaining 
scene of The Countrey Wit, Sir Mannerly Shallow, a pompous 

1 Works, I, 127. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 179 

country poltroon, and his man Booby (whose name characterizes 
him) show enthusiastic appreciation of the heroical qualities : 

''Sir Man. Oh, I have all the new comedy books, and 
tragedy books sent me, as fast as ever they are made. Oh, I 
love them that huff the gods, they make no more of a god 
than we do of a constable. 

Boo. Your Worship and I acted a tragedy book, you know. 

Sir Man. Yes, and I was a hero, and I remember two of 
the bravest lines. 

If saucy Jove my enemy appears, 

I'll pull him out o' heaven by the ears. 
There's ramping for you. 

Lady Fad. Saucy Jove ! that's very great ! that took might- 
ily here . . . 

Lady Fad. Oh, they have a brave ingenious way of writ- 
ing now. 

Sir Man. Oh, but then the fine tender things that make 
you cry. You must know, aunt, my part was to be in love 
with my dairy-maid, and her name was Celemena, and mine 
was Philaster, and I cried 

How does my fairest Celemena do? 
and she cried 

Thank you my dear Philaster, how do you ? 

Lady Fad. Very natural and soft. 

Boo. Oh, the dairy-maid is very soft. 

Sir Man. Oh, but the two next are tender. I cried 

Does my sweatheart me any kindness bear ? 
And she cried 

I love you dearly, now, I vow and swear . . . 

Sir Man. And then they have the finest, odd out of the 
way of similes, similes that are most commonly no similes at 
all, as now, speaking of a lady's bright eyes, one says 

How do the nimble glories of her eye, 

Frisk and curvett, and swiftly gallop by? 
There's a fine comparison, to compare a lady's ^eye to a 
horse. 

Lady Fad. Ay, and nimble is a fine odd, out of the way 
epithet for glories, nimble glories. Well, dear chuck, how 
camest thou by this admirable and, as I may say, nimble know- 
ledge? . . . ."2 

2 fVorks, III, 82-85. 



180 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

In Spite of this sensible satire upon the most vulnerable aspects 
of the heroic drama, Crowne came forward with the heroic two-part 
play, The Destruction of Jerusalem, in 1677. Dryden had an- 
nounced his intention of abandoning rime in the prologue to Aureng- 
Zehe (1675), and even Crowne was conscious of the growing hos- 
tility to the form, for in the epilogue to Part I he writes, 
"First for his rhyme he pardon does implore, 
And promises to ring those chimes no more."^ 
Some of the very defects which he satirized in The Countrey Wit 
are painfully evident in the new play. Phraartes is not so consum- 
mate a ranter as Almanzor, but he rivals the ludicrous lines quoted 
by Sir Mannerly — 

"If saucy Jove my enemy appears, 
I'll pull him out o' heaven by the ears" — 
when, upon the death of Clarona, he exclaims, 
"Where is Clarona gone ? 
Aloft ! — I see her mounting to the sun ! — 
The flaming Satyr towards her does roll. 
His scorching lust makes summer at the Pole. 
Let the hot planet touch her if he dares — 
Touch her, and I will cut him into stars, 
And the bright chips into the ocean throw !"* 
Dialogue of an argumentative nature, which is a noticeable blemish 
in Dryden's heroic plays, is also found to a distressing degree in 
The Destruction of Jerusalem. Titus and Berenice dispute con- 
cerning love and duty and Phraartes debates with Clarona on relig- 
ious matters. Here again, as in Charles the Eighth, the background 
of the action is war and conquest, but to that is added the civil strife 
of the Jews. The two parts of The Destruction of Jerusalem de- 
served greater success than Charles the Eighth, but the wild applause 
with which they were greeted puzzles the modern critic. The couplets 
are mediocre, the characterization is artificial, and the emotion is 
forced. Both the parts of the play, especially the second, afford 
opportunities for elaborate scenic effects, such as the burning of the 
temple, and to these must have been due in large measure the phe- 
nomenal success of the piece. 

The reaction against the heroic drama which we have already 
noted, led playwrights to abandon couplets for blank verse and to 

3 Works, II, 311. 

4 Works, II, 383. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 181 

do away with many of the absurdities of the type. Dryden, the 
staunchest defender of rime, came forward in 1678 with a blank- 
verse tragedy, All for Love, which takes rank as his best drama, and 
Crowne followed his lead in the next year with The Ambitious 
Statesman. Much of the artificiality of the heroic style still remains 
in this tragedy, but the hero, the Duke of Vendosme, is no longer 
a superman who stakes his individual prowess against vast odds. 
He is a successful general, but he is distinguished from most of the 
tragic characters of the day by his philosophical turn of mind. The 
half-comic La Marre is a noticeably unheroical product and shows 
a reversion to the Elizabethan practice. One searches in vain for a 
figure intended to be comic in the serious dramas which immediately 
preceded. In structure, The Ambitious Statesman shows a departure 
from the heroic play. The number of characters is comparatively 
small, and yet the chief emphasis is on plot. 

During the years 1680 and 1681, when the religious and poli- 
tical turmoil was at its worst, Crowne expended his energies in 
adapting older tragedies. For his first efforts of this kind he went 
to Shakespeare, and altered parts of the trilogy of Henry VI. The 
Miseries of Civil-War and Henry the Sixth, the First Part are mere 
rehashes of the Shakespearean plays, and vitiate rather than improve 
their originals. Such perversion, however, is deliberate. In the one 
case Crowne means to warn England against the results of Civil war, 
in the other to satirize Catholicism. Yet, bad as they are, these 
adaptations still show Elizabethan influences at work. Crowne en- 
larges upon the comic element of his original in Henry the Sixth, 
the First Part by the introduction of the protesting Third Murderer. 
In both reworkings the blank verse shows Fletcherian characteristics. 

Crowne's third adaptation was a far worthier effort. With the 
plot of Seneca's Thyestes for a frame-work, he built up a play which 
in plot, at least, is an improvement on Seneca. He softens the re- 
volting features of the classical story by reducing the victims of 
Atreus's revenge to one, and he gives the plot greater human interest 
by adding Antigone as the betrothed of Philisthenes. Crowne 
handles his tragic theme with real convincingness at times and de- 
lineates Antigone, Philisthenes, and Aerope with a sympathy which 
is rare with him. His use of Seneca as a source again suggests a 
certain kinship to the Elizabethans. 

For a period of seven years after the production of Thyestes, 
Crowne devoted himself exclusively to comedy. When he came 



182 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

forward with Darius in 1688, after a long illness, he wrote that he 
was aware of the taste of the age for comedy, but that his gloomy- 
spirit forced tragedy upon him. In the number of good lines and 
passages which it contains Darius ranks first among Crowne's trage- 
dies. On the other hand, the character of the Persian king is not 
well suited for dramatic presentation, and Lee had already developed 
the tragic possibiHties of his family in The Rival Queens (1677). 
The fate of Darius should arouse our pity, but in spite of some good 
delineation, Crowne's character does not get from us the sympathy 
which we feel for Antigone and Philisthenes. The management of 
the sub-plot, a triangular love episode between Bessus, his young 
wife Barzana, and his bastard son Memnon, gives proof of Crowne's 
skill as an adapter. He borrowed the entanglement from the Hip- 
polytus of Euripides and thus filled out the undramatic story of 
Darius. Aside from Darius, Barzana is the best delineated char- 
acter in the play. The tragic difficulties of her passion for her hus- 
band's son are well brought out. 

Crowne's Regulus (1692) illustrates the conflicting forces which 
are present in his later tragedies. The major plot is derived from 
the Regulus of Nicolas Pradon, a minor French playwright of the 
neo-classical school. Pradon deviated from the historical accounts 
of Regulus in order to preserve the unities. Crowne in turn fol- 
lows Pradon's changes, but casts the unities to the winds and lays 
about half of his scenes in Carthage. He is further at variance with 
the "classical" spirit in the introduction of the ghost of Apamia, 
and in the use of comic prose scenes to develop the minor characters. 
These elements, which violate so-called decorum, are due to Eliza- 
bethan influence. The theme of the play is a conflict between love 
and duty in which duty wins. In the heroic drama love is the victor 
in such struggles; yet Regulus is in many respects an heroic char- 
acter. He has much to say about his duty and the glory of dying 
for Rome, but he is an artificial creation and fails to win our sym- 
pathy. A like criticism applies to Fulvia, who in her arguments 
with Regulus resembles Berenice in The Destruction of Jerusalem, 
Part II. 

In his last tragedy, Caligula (1698), Crowne largely abandoned 
earlier English tradition and developed a drama more akin to French 
classical tragedy. In the thinness of the plot and the lack of action 
he ran counter to English taste, and he felt obliged to defend himself 
in his epistle to the reader. He says that he developed history as he 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 183 

found it, but we have seen that in Darius, for example, he did not 
hesitate to add another plot to suit his needs. There are other in- 
dications, also, that Crowne was conscious of the growing "classi- 
cal" tendency in literary circles. He observes the unities in Caligula 
and neglects the opportunity of introducing a ghost when his source 
clearly admits of one. In form Crowne's last tragedy is more or 
less of a curiosity. It is written in heroic couplets, and yet it cannot 
be classified as an heroic drama. Its central figure, the emperor, 
is anything but heroic, and Valerius Asiaticus, though he is of heroic 
stuff, is not the dominating force in the play. Furthermore, the 
licentiousness of an emperor is not an heroic theme. In subject 
matter and general treatment Caligula is much more akin to Fletch- 
er's Valentinian, as Button has pointed out, than to the heroic drama.'^ 

When we consider Crowne's tragedies as a group, several ob- 
servations immediately suggest themselves. For the sources of his 
plots he was largely indebted to classical historians and dramatists. 
Five of his tragedies can be definitely traced to the ancients. Of 
these The Destruction of Jerusalem owes much to the De Bella 
Judaico of Josephus ; Thyestes is built upon the framework of Sen- 
eca's play, with a suggestion from Sophocles' Antigone; Darius is 
derived from the history of Quintus Curtius and the Hippolytus 
of Euripides ; Regulus is taken in part from Polybius and Appian ; 
and finally Caligula is drawn in the main from Suetonius and Philo. 
Two of these dramas, however, owe more or less to French sources. 
In The Destruction of Jerusalem, Part II, Crowne was considerably 
influenced by Racine's Berenice, and for Regulus he borrowed 
largely from a French tragedy by Pradon. The heroic drama, 
Charles the Eighth, is based on French history, but in this instance 
Crowne's immediate source seems to have been an English trans- 
lation of Guiccardini's history. The plot of The Ambitious States- 
man is probably fictitious, but in this case also the setting is French. 
Thus of Crowne's ten tragedies, only the Shakespearean adapta- 
tions are of English origin, and these retain so much from the 
older plays that they can hardly be classified with his original 
work. 

For theatrical effects Crowne relied to a noticeable degree upon 
supernatural agencies, especially ghosts, of which we find specimens 
in seven of his tragedies. In Charles the Eighth, the ghost of John 
Galeazzo, the young Duke of Milan who was poisoned by his uncle 

6 G. B. Dutton, Theory and Practice in English Tragedy, 1650-1700. Englische 
Studien, XLIX, 212. 



184 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Lodovico, enters to warn Isabel of her approaching death. The 
tortured spirit of Herod appears in The Destruction of Jerusalem, 
Part I, when the Edomites are about to break into the city, and 
gloats over the destruction which is to follow. In The Miseries of 
Civil-War, Crowne introduces the spectre of Richard II to warn 
King Henry and to foreshadow his murder by Richard of Glocester. 
In the later Shakespearean adaptation, Henry the Sixth, the First 
Part, the ghost of Duke Humphrey torments the villainous Cardinal, 
but here Crowne merely follows the older play. The ghost of Tan- 
talus likewise appears in the prologue of Seneca's Thyestes, but 
Crowne changes the occasion for his entrance and makes him disturb 
the sleeping Atreus. At the close of Darius, the ghost of the mur- 
dered king appears "brightly habited," and smiles when he sees the 
bodies of his assassins "hung in chains, and stuck with darts." Final- 
ly, in Regulus Crowne brings in the ghost of Apamia, the wife of 
the Roman commander. She serves the mechanical purpose of warn- 
ing Regulus not to risk battle, and later of causing Fulvia to swoon 
so that he can make a good exit. In The Destruction of Jerusalem, 
Part I, we meet with other manifestations of the supernatural. On 
the night of the storm, an aerial army appears in the heavens, a 
prophet cries woe to Jerusalem, and a mysterious voice is heard to 
say, "Let us depart !" To this array of theatrical agencies Crowne 
adds an angel, who declares that the doom of the city is foreordained. 
So persistent a use of unreal devices — ghosts, angels, aerial armies, 
and mysterious voices— is good evidence that Restoration audiences 
enjoyed these sensational effects. 

In tragic characterization Crowne's powers are distinctly lim- 
ited. He lacks, for example, Otway's ability to realize intense emo- 
tion in such characters as Belvidera, Jaffeir, and Monimia, and the 
sympathetic understanding with which Dryden reveals his Antony 
and Cleopatra. He can make his characters theatrically effective, 
but he seldom penetrates below the surface or makes any attempt to 
comprehend the motives of his men and women. Thus the Constable 
in The Ambitious Statesman and Atreus in Thyestes are good stage 
villains, but they are little more. In a few of his characters, how- 
ever, Crowne approaches real artistic achievement. The lovers, 
Antigone and Philisthenes, are more real in their suffering than any 
other of his tragic pairs, and appeal strongly to our sympathies. 
Among his heroes the Duke of Vendosme is, in my opinion, most 
vividly characterized, perhaps because Crowne has inspired him with 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 185 

something of his own philosophical inclinations and contempt for 
court Hfe. 

We may note, in taking leave of Crowne as a writer of tragedy, 
some of the opinions which have been held concerning his work in 
that field. Gosse characterizes him as "a dull writer, artificially 
stirred now and then for a moment into a coarse kind of stage ani- 
mation."^ Richard Garnet finds the success of his heavy tragedies 
hard to understand, and adds, "The only one of Crowne's serious 
dramas entitled to much consideration is Darius where the poetry is 
frequently fine, but the characters are tame."^ A. T. Bartholomew 
says that "Crowne, so far as his tragedies are concerned, might be 
called a second-rate Lee. His plays have all of Lee's turgidity, with 
none of that author's redeeming though crazy picturesqueness. They 
present a dead level of mediocrity . . . "^ The most keenly 
critical judgment upon Crowne's tragedies, in my opinion, has been 
passed by Dr. A. W. Ward, who says : "As a writer of tragedy he 
holds a conspicuous place among the followers of several styles, for 
he can hardly be said to have a style of his own. Often happy in 
the choice and ingenious in the construction of his plots, he possesses 
a certain power of coarse but not ineffective characterization. But 
he entirely lacks not only refinement, but elevation of sentiment; 
and in beauty of form he cannot be said to approach Dryden."^ 
Gerald Langbaine, a contemporary of Crowne, regarded him as mor^ 
fortunate in comedy than in tragedy,^*^ and this has been the gen- 
eral concensus of critical opinion since his time. 

IL THE COMEDIES 

Crowne's first acted play gave no definite indication that real- 
istic comedy was to be the field of his most successful efforts. 
Juliana (1671) is a romantic comedy of the type which Dryden had 
developed in The Rival Ladies (1663). In fact, the two plays have 
many features in common. In each case the plot is partially 
motivated by disguisings ; there is plentiful fighting, with the danger 
of a tragic outcome; and the action is delayed while a masque is 
performed. Furthermore, they are similar in form. Each is written 
mainly in blank verse, but there are some prose passages and a 
sprinkling of couplets. But in merit Juliatm does not compare 

6 Gosse, A History of Eighteenth Century Literature, p. 59. 

7 Garnett, The Age of Dryden, pp. 114-115. 

8 A. T. Bartholomew in The Cambridge History of English Literature, VIII, 189-190. 
sWard, op. cit.. Ill, 399. 

10 Langbaine, p. 90. 



186 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

favorably to Dryden's play. It is an unpromising first effort. The 
exposition is not well managed and the plot is very confused. The 
characters, too, are but slightly individualized, except Paulina and 
the Landlord. Paulina holds our interest much better than Juliana, 
and the Landlord is significant as the first low-comedy figure which 
Crowne attempted. He is the elder brother of Sir Mannerly Shal- 
low and Booby in The Countrey Wit, of the Ranters and Dullman 
in The English Frier, of Craffy in City Politiques, of Crack in Sir 
Courtly Nice, and of Shittlecock in The Married Beau. What suc- 
cess Juliana had on the stage, must have been due to his coarse buf- 
foonery. 

The so-called masque, Calisto, was Crowne's next dramatic pro- 
duction not serious in nature. Strictly speaking, we should not in- 
clude it in a discussion of his comedies, since it does not belong to 
the genre; but Evelyn, who saw it at court, calls it a "comedie" as 
well as a pastoral,^^ and for convenience we shall consider it here. 
As we have seen above,^^ Crowne was commissioned to write a 
masque. In 1674, however, little knowledge remained of the form 
which Ben Jonson had developed. The result of Crowne's efforts 
was a bastard type. The allegorical prologue and various entries 
continue the masque tradition, but the story of Calisto is presented in 
a five-act play, similar in form to the regular drama. The piece is 
neo-classical in its use of a mythological theme and in the observa- 
tion of the unities. Besides these elements, at the end of each act 
a Httle pastoral scene is represented, followed by entries and chor- 
uses. In view of this last feature Reyher and Miss Marks have class- 
ified it as a pastoral.^^ 

Calisto shows Crowne's ingenuity as a plotter. By skilful addi- 
tions and changes he has made an offensive myth into a play suit- 
able, even in the opinion of John Evelyn, for young princesses and 
noblewomen to act. The literary merit of the piece is slight. The 
slender classical story demanded good lines to make it attractive, 
but Crowne had no great talent for writing good lines. 

In 1675 Crowne turned his attention to the new prose comedy 
of the day, and began his career as a realistic comic dramatist. His 
first drama of this kind. The Countrey Wit (1675), has many fea- 
tures in common with the plays of Etherege and Wycherley, but it 
differs from them in containing a large amount of low comedy "al- 
ii The Diary of John Evelyn, op. cit., II, 305. 

12 See above, Chapter II, pp. 74-75. 

13 P. Reyher, Les Masques Anglais, p. 476; Jeannette Marks, English Pastoral 
Drama, p. 61. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 187 

most sunk to farce." Sir Mannerly Shallow and his man Booby are 
caricatures of country ignorance of city ways. Crowne exaggerates 
their blunders in order to produce farcical effects. Lady Faddle and 
Isabella are also somewhat overdrawn for the same purpose. Most 
of the other characters, however, are realistic types from London 
life. Sir Thomas Rash represents the hostility of the older genera- 
tion to the free-and-easy morality of the young city rakes, of whom 
Ramble is an example. Lord Drybone is an elderly debauchee in 
contrast to Ramble, while Betty Frisque illustrates the type of gay 
adventuress then much in evidence. The heroine, Christina, unsul- 
lied by Restoration immorality, is an exceptional though by no 
means a unique figure. 

Although the four remaining comedies of Crowne all contain a 
farcical element, in no case is it so largely developed as in The 
Countrey Wit. They conform more strictly to the type of realistic 
comedy which satirized the foibles of a limited group of court char- 
acters. Two of them. City Politiques and The English Frier are 
modified by political or religious motives. 

City Politiques (1683) is a mordant satire upon the Whig fac- 
tion; hence four of the major characters are impersonations of men 
of the day. They are sufficiently individualized for recognition, but 
certain traits of character are exaggerated as a means of ridicule. 
Thus the peculiarities of Bartoline's speech and the profanity of Dr. 
Panchy are emphasized to an undue extent. The role of Craffy is 
a caricature of an entire class — the whole group of Whig poets and 
pamphleteers. The non-political characters — Florio and Rosaura, 
Artall and Lucinda — are more realistic. Florio and Lucinda, like 
their prototypes Horner and Mrs. Pinchwife, in Wycherley's Coun- 
try Wife, are true portraits from Restoration society, the one a con- 
firmed rake, and the other an unsophisticated country girl who loses 
her naivete rapidly enough. The wanton Rosaura mirrors the notori- 
ously immoral women of the court, such as we meet in the memoir 
of Count Grammont. 

The English Frier is colored primarily by a religious motive, — 
the satire of Catholic practices during the reign of James II, — but 
it is political as well in attacking the Tory parasites, such as Lord 
Stately, who submitted to priestly domination in order to retain posi- 
tions of influence or to secure advancement. Father Finical is the 
only character in the play who is to be identified with an actual per- 
son, and in this case the probable identification is complicated by the 



188 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

relation between the friar and the hypocritical Tartuffe. In any case 
there is more downright realism in the delineation of Finical than 
in the politically colored caricatures in City Politiques. Besides the 
friar, Crowne has given us excellent portraits from the time in the 
ceremonious Lord Stately, the coquette Laura, and the niggardly 
Lady Pinch-gut. The never failing farcical element appears in the 
characters of the Ranters and Dullman. 

The two comedies which we have just considered are interest- 
ing from an historical point of view, but their political and religious 
coloring is a blemish from the literary point of view. Crowne's 
most artistic comedies are almost entirely free from partisan bias. In 
Sir Courtly Nice, unquestionably his best drama, two political char- 
acters still remain, — Hothead and Testimony, but these are impar- 
tial satires upon the extreme Tories and Whigs, — types which con- 
tinued with only slight variations through many evolutions of English 
politics. Only one character in Sir Courtly Nice lacks convincing 
reality. The conduct of the wizard Crack is farcical, but as Dennis 
recognized, the Tarugo of Moreto's comedy is the center of all the 
intrigues, and Crowne could not omit him without offense to the 
king. The other characters which he borrowed from the Spanish 
play he was able to cast into realistic personages. Thus Leonora 
and Violante are well-drawn English young ladies, and Bellguard 
and Farewel have much more individuality than Don Pedro and Don 
Felix. The characterization of the fastidious fop, Sir Courtly Nice, 
however, shows Crowne at his best. He is Crowne's most enduring 
contribution to the galaxy of Restoration comic portraits, and was 
so regarded by his contemporaries. Dennis is effusive in his praise 
of the piece, but much that he says shows keen discrimination. "All 
that is of English Growth in Sir Courtly Nice," he writes, "is ad- 
mirable; for tho' we find in it neither the fine Designing of Ben. 
Johnson; nor the general and masculine satire of Wycherly; nor 
that Grace, that Delicacy, nor that Courtly Air which make the 
Charms of Etherege; yet is the Dialogue so lively and so spirited, 
and so attractively diversified and adapted to the several characters ; 
four of these Characters are so entirely new yet so general and so 
important, and are drawn so truly and so graphically, and oppos'd 
to each other, Surly to Sir Courtly and Hothead to Testimony, with 
such a strong and entire Opposition ; . . . that tho' I have more 
than twenty times read over this charming Comedy, yet have I al- 
ways read it, not only with Delight and Rapture. And 'tis my 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 189 

opinion that the greatest Comic poet that ever Hv'd in any Age, 
might have been proud to have been the Author of it."^* 

Crowne's last extant comedy, The Married Beau (1694) is also 
a work of considerable artistic merit. It is especially noteworthy 
for its form, affording a rare instance of Fletcherian blank verse in 
realistic comedy. Like Sir Courtly Nice, it is founded on a Spanish 
plot, but here again the characters are changed into English figures 
familiar to the Restoration public. Lovely is a vainglorious beau, 
his wife is a coquette, and Polidor is a rakish bachelor. Once more 
a farcical character intrudes in the person of Sir John Shittlecock. 
The uncompromising realism of the piece, perhaps more than any- 
thing else, caused it to be forgotten when the cynicism of that age 
gave way to the sentimentalism of the next. 

One of the serious defects in Restoration comedy is the lack of 
unity in the action, and this fault Crowne shares with his fellow- 
craftsmen. In The Countrey Wit the action of the main plot de- 
velops very slowly, and is resolved not by any conflict of forces, 
but by the self-elimination of Sir Mannerly when he ignorantly 
marries the porter's daughter. Ramble is the only real link between 
the major and minor action. The sub-plot, adapted bodily from 
Moliere, naturally shows swifter development and holds our interest 
much better. City Politiques is fashioned on the Jonsonese type of 
plot. The action moves forward by the series of tricks which Florio 
devises in order to win Rosaura. The political satire of the play 
is naturally evolved from these efforts, but at other times it runs 
its course independently. In his two comedies from Spanish sources 
Crowne achieved greater unity of plot, but both in Sir Courtly Nice 
and in The Married Beau he did not vary greatly from his originals, 
except as he changed the catastrophe of Cervantes' story in the sec- 
ond play. The plot of The English Frier is technically the most 
defective of any which Crowne invented. The main action, which 
is his own, is very thin and not well motivated. The sub-plot, 
though well adapted from Moliere's Tartuffe, runs a separate course 
practically until the last act, when Sir Thomas Credulous and Lord 
Wiseman are brought together to provide the necessary contact. 
Like other comic poets of the day, Crowne lays the emphasis on 
delineation of character, and on the cleverness of individual scenes. 

In accord with the current practice, Crowne chose his characters 
from a limited circle of London life. His rakes vary in degree from 

14 Dennis, I, 52-53. 



190 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

the gay intriguing Ramble, the jealous old Lord Drybone, and the 
obliging Polidor, to the confirmed debauchee, Florio. Over against 
this immoral class, Crowne balances a healthier type. Among the 
younger men Bellguard, Farewel, Wiseman, and Bellmour have a 
sane outlook, while the more mature Sir Thomas Credulous exposes 
the sensuality of Finical, and Sir Thomas Rash berates the licen- 
tiousness of city life. In Sir Courtly Nice and Mr. Lovely, Crowne 
lashes the fastidious, vainglorious coxcombs of the day, and in 
Laura and Mrs. Lovely he shows the weakness of the coquette and 
the danger which she risks of sullying her honor. Even Laura and 
Mrs. Lovely are less characteristic of the cynical Restoration woman, 
however, than the amorous Lady Faddle, the wanton Rosaura, the 
niggardly Lady Pinch-gut, and the gay adventuress, Betty Frisque. 
On the whole, we find in Restoration comedy but few examples of 
women who do not reflect in some way a blase attitude toward 
morality; yet Crowne presents two such characters. Christina, the 
heroine of The Countrey Wit, preserves her purity in an atmosphere 
of intrigue, and is sympathetically portrayed. In The Married Beau 
the saintly qualities of Camilla are emphasized, but her emotional 
coldness is contrasted unfavorably with the weakness of Mrs. Lovely, 
who falls and repents. 

Since delineation of character was the chief point of emphasis 
in realistic comedy, Crowne expended his fund of originality on 
that aspect of his work and went to foreign sources for his plots as 
occasion required. For two of his comedies he was indebted to the 
Spanish. For the first, Charles II gave him Moreto's No Puede Ser 
and bade him make an English play from it. Sir Courtly Nice was 
the result. For The Married Beau he used Cervantes' famous story, 
El Curioso Impertinente. Yet in both instances Crowne showed his 
careful workmanship by adapting his plots and characters thoroughly 
to English conditions. The greatest single influence upon Crowne 
as a writer of comedy, however, came from Moliere. The indebt- 
edness of the more gifted playwrights (such as Etherege, Wycher- 
ley, and Congreve) to Moliere has frequently been overestimated, 
but Crowne's debt is a very real one. His most obvious borrowings 
are in plots and characters. Thus the sub-plot of The Countrey Wit 
is taken almost bodily from Le Sicilien, and the role of Father 
Finical and the exposure of his hypocrisy, avarice, and sensuality 
owe much to Tartuffe. Certain of Crowne's characters also have 
prototypes in MoHere's plays. Lady Pinch-gut and her coachman 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 191 

were suggested by Harpagon and Maitre Jacques ; Sir Thomas Rash 
is a variation of the hard-hearted father who attempts to force his 
daughter to marry for money ; the impertinent maid-servant Isabella 
is copied from Dorine; and the two amorous, marriage-mad aunts 
are reminiscent of Belise in Les Femmes Savantes. In technique 
also Crowne shows a careful study of Moliere's methods. He imi- 
tates the French dramatist's use of staccato in dialogue, often with 
very good effect. At other times he employs dramatic heightening 
as a feature of his delineation of character, as in Sir Thomas Rash, 
in Lord Stately, and in Sir Courtly Nice. Moliere's device of pre- 
paring the way thoroughly for the appearance of the principal char- 
acter, and of delaying his entrance until the third act, Crowne finds 
useful in Sir Courtly Nice. In that same play he employs another 
trick of which Moliere was fond — ^that of character contrast. Surly 
is introduced as an effective antithesis to Sir Courtly. There is a 
similar opposition in the characters of Hothead and Testimony. 
One is a rabid Tory, and the other a canting, hypocritical Presby- 
terian. Crowne owes a large debt to Moliere both for material and 
for technical suggestions, but he is an apt disciple and adjusts 
his borrowings with careful workmanship. Thus in transferring 
the traits of Harpagon from L'Avare to Lady Pinch-gut in The 
English Frier he not only reproduces the comic incongruity of the 
original, but also utilizes his borrowings for his immediate purpose 
— satire upon the powers of the priesthood.^^ 

Crowne's comic gift does not compare favorably with the light 
and graceful humor of Etherege, with the heavier masculine irony 
of Wycherley, or with the scintillating wit of Congreve; but we 
must grant him a genuine feeling for the incongruous, and a talent 
for writing satire, which, if caustic and coarse, is frequently very 
clever. The humor of his plays develops largely out of his char- 
acters. As we have seen, he brings opposites together for comic 
effect. Thus the presence of Surly in Sir Courtly's dressing room 
results in a truly humorous situation. Similarly the associating of 
Hothead and Testimony as guardians of Leonora's virtue is fraught 
with comic possibilities. 

In his satirical touches Crowne is equally happy. The par- 
simonious nature of Lady Pinch-gut becomes very laughable when 
she is confronted with her coachman. The exposure of Father 
Finical's sensuality also must have afforded pleasure to good Protas- 
is cf. Miles, op. cit., pp. 95, 119, 130-131, 142, 146-147, 158, 165, 193. 



192 WESTERN RESERVE, STUDIES 

tant theatre-goers just as Craffy's characterization of Dr. Panchy 
must have delighted the Tories. The unscrupulous lawyers of the 
day are entertainingly exposed in the character of Bartoline. The 
role is effective in spite of Crowne's exploitation of Bartoline's 
physical defects. Yet Crowne's range of satire is not entirely limited 
to political and religious figures. Sir Mannerly Shallow's comments 
on heroic drama are much to the point. 

The dialogue of Crowne's comedies is fluent and generally 
well suited to his characters, but there is no attempt consistently 
to heighten it for theatrical effects. It is likely, as Miles suggests, 
that Crowne "did not share the prevalent admiration for the in- 
cessant cackling of similitude and paradox."^^ 

It is a commonplace of literary criticism to say that the comedy 
of the Restoration period is notoriously immoral. Lamb's notion 
that the characters of this comedy "have got out of Christendom 
into the land of — what shall I call it? — of cuckoldry — the Utopia 
of gallantry, whose pleasure is duty, and the manners perfect 
freedom,"^^ was long ago exploded by Macaulay, who has shown 
that this same comedy holds up the mirror to Hfe as it then 
existed and is an authentic document of Restoration society.^^ At 
the close of the seventeenth century the inevitable reaction set 
in. In 1697 Richard Blackmore, in the preface to his heroic poem. 
King Arthur, after praising Congreve's Mourning Bride for its 
modesty and chaste diction, hopes "that hereafter no slovenly 
Writer will be so hardy as to offer to our Piiblick Audiences his 
obscene and prophane Pollutions, to the great Offence of all Persons 
of Vertue and good Sense." "The common Pretence that the 
Audience will not be otherwise pleas'd," he continues, "is now wholly 
remov'd; for here is a notorious Instance to the contrary. And it 
must be look'd on hereafter as the Poet's fault, and not the People's, 
if we have not better Performances. All men must now conclude 
that 'tis for want of Wit and Judgment to support them that our 
Poets for the Stage apply themselves to such low and unworthy 
ways to recommend their Writings; and therefore I cannot but 
conceive Great Hopes that every good Genius for the future will 
look on it self debas'd by condescending to Write in that lewd 
Manner, that has been of late years introduc'd, and too long en- 

i« Miles, op. cit., p. 193. 

17 Charles Lamb, On the Artificial Comedy of the Last Century, ed. by Brander 
Matthews, p. 152. 

18 Macaulay, Comic Dramatists of the Restoration. Critical and Miscellaneous Essays, 
IV. 24-25. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 193 

courag'd. And if this comes to pass the Writers of the late Reigns 
will be asham'd of their Works, and wish they had their Plays 
in again as well as their fulsome Dedications."^^ It is significant 
that Crowne should have felt called upon to reply to Blackmore's 
impersonal attack. In his preface to Caligula (1698) he writes: 
"I am sorry that the learned author of King Arthur, who labours 
so commendably for virtue and morality in plays, should set an 
ill example, and injure truth and the reputation of his brethren. 
Many of my plays have been successful, and yet clean. Sir Courtly 
Nice was as fortunate a comedy as has been written in this age ; and 
Sir Courtly is as nice and clean in his conversation as in his diet 
and dress. And Surly, though he affects ill manners in everything 
else, is not guilty of obscene talk."^^ 

In his considerations of The English Frier, Grosse quotes 
Crowne's assertion in the epilogue that 

''To revive English virtue, drive away 
Folly and vice, is aim'd at in this play,"^^ 
and concludes, "Hierin ist Crownes Bedeutung nicht zu unter- 
schatzen; er ist ein Vorkampfer Steeles und der Schriftsteller 
Blackmore und Collier."^- If Crowne had been conscious that his 
English Frier anticipated Blackmore in declaring war upon the 
obscenity and immorality of the stage, we may feel sure that he 
would have taken due credit to himself in his reply, but he is 
strangely silent about the moral qualities of all his comedies except 
Sir Courtly Nice, and merely expresses his regret that in one of 
his tragedies he "made too beautiful an image of an Atheist." In- 
deed, there is a reason for his failure to refer to The English Frier. 
Though his purpose in this play is "to revive English virtue, drive 
away Folly and vice" by caustic satire against the priesthood, — 
in common with other writers of comedy, he has the double inten- 
tion of producing pleasure as well as profit. As he says in the 
prologue : 

"All sects and parties lend him stuff for plays. 
And his delight, though not his fortune raise. 
Goods borrowed thus he does not long retain, 
But on the stage brings fools and knaves again 
To those that lent 'em, that they may have use, 
Profit and pleasure of their own produce. "^^ 

19 Richard Blackmore, King Arthur. An Heroi'ck Poem. Preface, pp. vii-viii. 

20 Works, IV, 353. 

21 Works, IV, 121. 

22 Grosse, p. 72. 

23 Works, IV. 27. 



194 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Thus Crowne's open exposure of Father Finical's hypocrisy, ava- 
rice, and sensuality is intended as much to dehght the audience 
as to reveal the friar's vices. 

An examination of The Covintrey Wit, City Politiques, The 
English Frier, and The Married Beau leads me to reject Grosse's 
charitable conclusion that "Crowne ist moralisch und will es sein"^'' 
and his further italicized assertion that "den Lustspielen Crownes 
liegt so eine sittliche Idee zu Grunde."^^ So far as I can see, there 
is no moral idea behind City Politiques. The Whig leaders are 
made the butt of ridicule entirely on political grounds. Further- 
more, when the immoral relations of Florio and Rosaura are ex- 
posed at the end of the play, the pair are defiant and continue their 
lewd course. There is nothing moral in this, surely ! The denoue- 
ment of The Married Beau is likewise immoral, but for other 
reasons. In altering the tragic ending of Cervantes' novel for 
purposes of comedy, Crowne leaves the vain, affected Mr. Lovely 
hoodwinked to the close as to the chastity of his wife, and reforms 
the repentant Mrs. Lovely and the rakish Polidor; but in making 
this change he ignores the logical consequences which should follow 
their action, and produces an effect more vicious than the open 
parading of Mrs. Lovely's seduction. In the other two comedies 
which we are here considering, vice is not triumphant, but it is 
displayed in and for itself. Ramble in The Countrey Wit preserves 
the rakish tenor of his way until the last act, when it is necessary 
for him to reform to win Christina. In this he differs not at 
all from the even more rakish Dorimant in Etherege's Sir Fopling 
Flutter. In the case of The English Frier, we have already seen 
that Crowne took particular delight in exposing openly the sen- 
suality of Father Finical. He even adapted a very clever scene 
from Moliere for that express purpose. If Crowne had really been 
a forerunner of Blackmore, Collier, and Steele in the fight against 
immorality and obscenity, his work would assume a place of large 
significance in the history of the English drama, but we cannot 
follow Grosse to this conclusion. Crowne's comedies are less im- 
moral than those of many of his contemporaries, but he could not 
escape the demands of a public which delighted in the mirror-like 
reproduction of its vices ; and, however moral his purpose may 

24 Grosse, p. 92. 

25 Grosse, p. 93. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 195 

have been, he certainly pandered at times to the vicious taste of 
the age.^^ 

Critical opinions of Crowne's merits as a comic poet vary- 
considerably. Maidment and Logan thought that ''as a writer 
of Comedies he is the superior of Dryden, who in no one instance 
produced anything to be compared to Sir Courtly Nice."^^ Dr. 
Ward is more severe in his judgment. ''As a writer of comedy," 
he says, "Crowne is in my opinion entitled to no high rank .... 
His comic dialogue is fluent both in prose and verse .... But 
his range of characters is limited, and no great vigour of humour 
signalises even the special type produced by him and varied in 
several of his plays. "^* Yet in his employment of a limited circle 
of characters, we must add in fairness to Crowne, he exhibits a 
fault almost universal in Restoration comedy until the time of 
Vanbrugh and Farquhar. The criticism of Garnett is in my opinion 
more just. He finds "the success of his [Crowne's] comedies . . . 
less difficult to understand. Here he really gave the public a fair 
reflection of itself and exhibited contemporary manners with truth, 
if with no great brilliancy .... He created a real type in the 
exquisite coxcomb. Sir Courtly Nice."^^ Crowne is distinctly the 
inferior of Etherege, Wycherley, Congreve, Vanbrugh and Farquhar, 
but he is entitled to a place in the second rank with Shadwell and 
Mrs. Behn. 

HI. CROWNE AS A POET. 

As we survey the works of Crowne at the close of our study, 
the fact becomes increasingly clear that he was a poet by force 
of circumstance, rather than by any inner necessity for literary 
expression. Had the American estate of his father been free 
from the unscrupulous control of Thomas Temple, and had inter- 
national treaties been more considerate of the rights of individuals, 
John Crowne, by his own confession, would not have "run into 
that Madness call'd Poetry," or have inhabited "that Bedlam call'd 
a Stage. "^° "Fame built on Poetry," he says, "is like a Castle in 
the Air, which the next Wind demolishes .... No wise Man 
can much regard what his share is in such a barren and floating 

26 Miles, p. 193, is of a contrary opinion. Crowne, he thinks was "too conscientious 
to pander to the tastes of his audiences by imprudent intrigue or indecent wit." A glance 
at City Politiques shovild be sufficient to settle this point. 

27 Works, I, xvii. 

28 Ward, op. cit.. Ill, 404. 
2y Garnett, op. cit., p. 114, 

so Henry the Sixth, the First Part. Dedication. 



196 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Place."^^ From the first Crowne's muse was commercial, and 
even in later years she 

"Kept shop, like a good creditable cit, 
But traded in damn'd never thriving wit."^^ 
He is not, as Grosse would have us believe, the first who con- 
sciously approaches the idea of improving the moral quality of 
comedy, nor is he important as a reformer of public taste.^^ He is 
noteworthy rather as a writer of distinctly second-rate talent whose 
works run the gamut of all the types of drama then in vogue. 
Since his first aim was to make a living, he was a keen observer 
of the conditions of the time and followed the taste of his public 
with an eye to the ultimate returns. Thus a study of his dramas 
gives us a clearer insight into the requirements of Restoration 
audiences than are revealed in the works of men of greater genius. 
By virtue of patient industry, he became a skillful workman, and 
in his tragedies he substituted cleverness in adaptation and con- 
struction of plots for the richer power to characterize well and 
write memorable lines. He was much more at home in comedy, 
where he possessed a small but natural gift. He went to school 
to Moliere for much of his technique, and in his lighter dramas 
he mirrored the follies and vices of his time with admirable faith- 
fulness, if with no great brilliancy. 

As a political and religious satirist, Crowne is frequently coarse 
and abusive, but at other times he shows a firm grasp of his 
material and is clever in his hits. The poetry of his serious dramas 
is almost entirely lacking in inspiration, beauty, or breadth of 
vision. In the prose dialogue of his comedies, however, he is 
fluent if not sparkling, and the easy flowing blank verse of his 
only poetical comedy is better than the great bulk of his work. 
Finally, Crowne deserves mention, in a period comparatively barren 
of lyrical melody, as a writer of several songs of genuine inspiration. 

31 Henry the Sixth, the First Part. Dedication. 

32 Works, III, 376. 
S3 Grosse, pp. 112-113. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 197 



BIBLIOGRAPHY^ 

Acts of the Privy Council of England, Colonial Series. 1613-1680, 
and "The Unbound Papers". Ed. James Munro and W. L. 
Grant. London, 1908-12. 

Andromache. A Tragedy. As it is Acted at the Dukes Theatre. 
London, 1675. 

Annual Miscellany for the Year 1694. [Collected by John Dryden] 
4th part. London, 1708. 

Appian of Alexandria, The Roman History of. Trans. Horace 
White. 2 vols. New York, 1899. 

Arber, Edward, A Transcript of the Registers of the Company of 
Stationers of London; 1554-1640 A. D. 5 vols. London, 
1875-94. 

The Term Catalogues, 1668-1709 A. D. ; with a Number for 
Easter Term, 1711 A. D. 3 vols. London, 1903-06. 

Auden, J. E., Shropshire and the Royalist Conspiracies .... 
1648-1660. In Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological 
and Natural History Society. 3rd series, vol. X, 1910. 

Bacon, Edgar M., Narragansett Bay Its Historic and Romantic 
Associations and Picturesque Setting. New York, 1904. 

Bartholomew, A. T., The Restoration Drama. III. In the Cam- 
bridge History of English Literature, vol. VIII, chap. VII. 
Cambridge, 1912. 

Beaumont, Francis, and Fletcher, John, The Works of. Variorum 
edition. London, 1904. 

Behn, Aphra, The Works of. Ed. by M. Summers. 6 vols. 
London, 1915. 

Beljame, Alexandre, Le Public et les Hommes de Lettres en Angle- 
terre au Dix-huitieme Siecle 1660-1744. Paris, 1881. 

[Bickerstaffe, Issac,] The Hypocrite: a Comedy. 2nd ed. London, 
1769. 

Biographia Dramatica; or a Companion to the Playhouse. Com- 
piled by David E. Baker, Isaac Reed, and Stephen Jones. 
4 vols, in three. London, 1812. 

Blackmore, Richard, King Arthur. An Heroick Poem in Twelve 
Books. London, 1697. 

1 This bibliography includes, in general, only the books referred to in the foot-notes. 
I have made no effort to list here the scores of volumes through which I paged in my 
search for material. 



198 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Blakeway, J. B., History of Shrewsbury Hundred or Liberties. 

In Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural 

History Society. 2nd Series, vol. I, 1889. 
Blore, Thomas, History of the Antiquities of the County of Rutland. 

Stanford, 1811. 
Boileau, N., Oeuvres Poetiques de. Ed. by P. Cheron. 2 vols. 

Paris, 1876. 
Brown, F. C, Elkanah Settle, His Life and Works. Chicago, 1910. 
Brown, Horatio, Studies in Venetian History. 2 vols. London, 

1907. 
Brydges, Sir Egerton, Censura Literaria. 2nd ed., 10 vols. London, 

1815. 
Buck, George, The Life and Reign of Richard the Third. In a 

Complete History of England by White Kennett. London, 1706. 
Burnet, Gilbert, History of His Own Time; with notes by the 

Earls of Dartmouth and Hardwicke, Speaker Onslow, and Dean 

Swift. 6 vols., 2nd ed. Oxford, 1833. 
Burney, Charles, A General History of Music. 4 vols. London, 

1776-89. 
Calendar of the Proceedings of the Committee for Advance of 

Money, 1642-1656. Ed. Mary A. E. Green. 3 vols. London, 

1888. 
Calendar of the Proceedings of the Committee for Compounding, 

1643-1660. Ed. Mary A. E. Green. 5 vols. London, 1889-92. 
Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series. [America and West 

Indies]. Volumes from 1574-1701. Ed. W. N. Saintsbury, 

J. W. Fortescue, Cecil Headlam. London, 1860-1910. 
Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series. Volumes from 1638- 

1680; from 1689 to 1703. Ed. John Bruce, W. D. Hamilton, 

Mary A. E. Green, W. J. Hardy, F. H. B. Daniell, and R. P. 

Mahaffy. London, 1869-1916. 
Calendar of Treasury Papers. Volumes from 1697 to 1714. Ed. 

Jos. Redington. London, 1871-79. 
Canfield, Dorothy, Corneille and Racine in England. New York, 

1904. 
Cervantes, Miguel de. The History of The Valorous & Witty 

Knight Errant Don Quixote of the Mancha. Trans. Thomas 

Shelton. 3 vols. London, 1908. 
Chalmers, George, Political Annals of the Present United Colonies. 

London, 1780. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 199 

Chancellor, Edward B., Historical Richmond. London, 1885. 
Charlanne, L., L'Influence Frangaise en Angleterre au XVII® 

Siecle. Paris, 1906. 
Chase, Lewis N., The English Heroic Play. [Columbia]. New 

York, 1903. 
[Chesholme,Thomas], The Steward's Book of Harvard College. 

[In the archives of the Harvard College Library]. 
Chester, J. L., London Marriage Licenses. London, 1887. 
[Chevalier, Pierre], A Discourse of the .... Cossacks, and 

the History of the Wars of the Cossacks against Poland. 

Trans, by Edward Brown. London, 1672. 
Child, C. G., The Rise of the Heroic Play. In Modern Language 

Notes, vol. XIX, 1904. 
Cibber, Colley, An Apology for the Life of. Ed. Robert W. Lowe. 

2 vols. London, 1889. 

The Dramatic Works of. 4 vols. London, 1754. 
Cibber, Theophilus [and others], The Lives of the Poets of Great 

Britain and Ireland to the Time of Dean Swift, 5 vols. London, 

1753. 
Cicero's Three Books of Offices. Trans. Cyrus R. Edmonds. 

London, 1856. 
Ciutterbuck, Robert, The History and Antiquities of the County 

of Hertford. 3 vols. London, 1827. 
Collier, Jeremy, A Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness 

of the English Stage. 2nd ed. London, 1698. 
Com[m]ines, [Philippe de]. The History of. Englished by Thomas 

Danett. Anno 1596. Tudor Translations. 2 vols. London, 

1897. 
Connor, Bernard, The History of Poland, in Several Letters to 

Persons of Quality. 2 vols. London, 1698. 
Corneille, P., Oeuvres de. Ed. Ch. Marty-Laveaux. 7 vols. Paris, 

1862. 
Crowne, John, The Dramatic Works of. With prefatory memoir 

and notes by Maidment, J. and Logan, W. H. 4 vols. Edin- 
burgh, 1873-74. 

The Miseries of Civil- War. A Tragedy, as it is Acted at the 

Dukes Theatre. London, 1680. 

Henry the Sixth, The First Part. With the Murder of Hum- 
phrey Duke of Gloucester. As it was Acted at the Dukes 

Theatre. London, 1681. 



200 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

A Poem on the Lamented Death of our Late Gratious Soveraign, 

King Charles the IL London, 1685. 

Daeneids, or the Noble Labours of the Great Dean of Notre- 

Dame in Paris . . . An Heroique Poem in Four Canto's. 

London, 1692. 
Crowne, William, A Trve Relation of All the Remarkable Places 

and Passages Observed in the Travels of the right honourable 

Thomas Lord Howard, Earle of Arundell and Surrey . . . 

Ambassadour Extraordinary to Ferdinand© the second . . . 

1636. London, 1637. 
Curtius, Quintus, The History of the Wars of Alexander the Great. 

Trans. John Digby. 2 vols., 3rd ed. London, 1747. 
Davenport, Robert, The Works of. Ed. A. H. Bullen in Old English 

Plays, new series, vol. IIL London, 1890. 
Davis, William H., Colonel William Crowne and his Family. In 

The New England Historical and Genealogical Register, vol. 

LVII, 1903. 
Dekker, Thomas, The Gull's Horn-Book. Ed. R. B. McKerrow. 

London, 1904. 
Dennis, John, Original Letters, Familiar, Moral and Critical. 2 

vols, in one. London, 1721. 
De Salvany, N. A., Histoire du Roi Jean Sobieski. 2 vols. Paris, 

1863. 
Dictionary of National Biography. 
Dio Cassius, Annals of Rome. Trans. H. B. Foster. 6 vols. Troy, 

N. Y., 1906. 

Historiae Romanae. Ed. Ursulus P. Boissevain. 3 vols. Berlin, 

1895-1901. 
Documentary History of the State of Maine containing the Baxter 

Manuscripts. Ed. James Phinney Baxter, vols. IV. and X. 

Portland, 1889, 1907. 
[Dodsley, Robert], Theatrical Records. London, 1756. 
Dodsley's Old English Plays. Ed. W. C. Hazlitt. 4th ed., 15 vols. 

London, 1874-76. 
[Downes, John], Roscius Anglicanus, or. An Historical Review of 

the Stage from 1660 to 1706. Fac-simile reprint of the 

1708 edition, ed. Jos. Knight. London, 1886. 
Dryden, John, The Critical and Miscellaneous Prose Works of. 

Ed. Edmund Malone. 3 vols, in four. London, 1800. 

The Works of. Ed. Scott and Saintsbury. 18 vols. Edin- 
burgh, 1882-93. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 201 

Dunlop, John, The History of Fiction. 3 vols. London, 1814. 
Button, G. B., Theory and Practice in English Tragedy 1650-1700. 

In Englische Studien, vol. XLIX, 1916. 
Early Settlers of Essex and Old Norfolk. In The New England 

Historical and Genealogical Register, vol. VI, 1852. 
Echard, Laurence, The History of England. 3rd ed. London, 1720. 
Egerton's Theatrical Remembrancer. London, 1788. 
Encyclopedia Brittanica. 
Etherege, Sir George, The Works of. Ed. A. Wilson Verity. 

London, 1888. 
Euripides, The Tragedies of. Trans. T. A. Buckley. 2 vols. New 

York, 1865. 
Evelyn, John, The Diary of. Ed. H. B. Wheatley. 4 vols. London, 

1906. 
Etvelyn, John, Life or Mrs. Godolphin. New York, 1847. 
Farquhar, George, The Plays of. Ed. Wm. Archer. Mermaid 

Series. London, 1905. 
Fielding, Henry, The History of Tom Jones a Foundling. 
Fitzgerald, Percy, A New History of the English Stage. 2 vols. 

London, 1882. 
Florius, L. Annaeus, Epitome Rerum Romanarum. Together with 

an English translation by John Clarke. 4th ed. London, 1746. 
Fogg, J. S. H., John Crowne — Dramatist and Poet. In the Maine 

Historical and Genealogical Recorder, vol. IV, 1888. 
Forsythe, R. S., A Study of the Plays of Thomas D'Urfey. In 

the Western Reserve University Bulletin, vol. XIX, 1916. 
Gairdner, James, History of the Life and Reign of Richard the 

Third. Cambridge, 1898. 
Garnett, Richard, The Age of Dryden. London, 1895. 
Gassier, Alfred, Le Theatre Espagnol. Paris, 1898. 
Gay, F. L., A Rough List of a Collection of Transcripts relating 

to the History of New England. Brookline, Mass., 1913. 
Gay Transcripts of State Papers and of the Temple Papers. [In 

the library of the Massachusetts Historical Society]. 
[Genest, John], Some Account of the English Stage from the Res- 
toration in 1660 to 1830. 10 vols. Bath, 1832. 
Gentleman's Journal: or the Monthly Miscellany, The. 1691-94. 
Gentleman's Magazine, The. Vol. XV. 1745. 
Gosse, Edmund, A History of Eighteenth Century Literature. Lon- 
don, 1889. 



202 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Grande Encyclopedie, La. Vol. XXVII. 

Granger, J., A Biographical History of England. 5th ed., 6 vols. 

London, 1824. 
Grosse, Wilhelm, John Crownes Komodien und burleske Dichtung. 

[Leipzig] 1903. 
Guiccardini, The History of. Trans. Geffray Fenton. London, 1618. 
Habington, John, The Life and Reign of Edward the Fourth. In 

A Complete History of England by White Kennett. London, 

1706. 
Halliwell, James O., A Dictionary of Old English Plays. London, 

1860. 
Halliwell-Phillipps, J. O., Illustrations of the Life of Shakespeare. 

Part First. London, 1874. 
Harvey- Jellie, W., Les Sources du Theatre Anglais a TEpoque de 

la Restauration. Paris, 1906. 
Hazlett, W. Carew, Bibliographical Collections and Notes. Second 

Series. London, 1882. 
Henslowe's Diary. Ed. Walter W. Greg. 2 vols. London, 1904-08. 
Heraclitus Ridens: or, A Discourse between Jest and Earnest. 

[Feb. 1, 1681, to August 22, 1682]. 
Heywood, Jasper, and his Translations of Seneca's Troas, Tyestes 

and Hercules Furens. Ed. H. De Vocht in Materialien zur 

Kunde des altern englischen Dramen. vol. XLI, Louvain, 

1913. 
Heywood, Thomas, The Dramatic Works of. 6 vols. London, 

1874. 
Hill, Herbert W., La Calprenede's Romances and the Restoration 

Drama. Reprinted from the University of Nevada Studies, 

vol. II, no. 3 (1910), and vol. Ill, no. 2 (1911). 
Holinshed's Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland. 6 vols. 

London, 1807. 
Hutchinson, [Thomas], The History of the Colony of Massachus- 

et's Bay 1628-1691. 2nd ed. London, 1765. 
[Jacob, Giles ], The Poetical Register: or the Lives and Characters 

of all the English Poets. 2 vols. London, 1723. 
Jacquinot, Adrien, L'Universite Harvard. In La Revue Inter- 
national de I'Enseignement. vols. I and II, 1881. 
Jennison, Samuel, William and John Crowne. In The New England 

Historical and Genealogical Register, vol. VI, 1852. 
Jonson, Ben, The Works of. Ed. W. Gifford and F. Cunningham. 

9 vols. London, 1875. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 208 

Josephus, Flavius, Opera recognovit Benedictus Ntiese, 6 vols. 

Berolini, 1888-95. 

The Works of. Trans. Wm. Whiston. 4 vols. Oxford, 1839. 
Jusserand, J. J., The English Novel in the Time of Shakespeare. 

Trans. Elizabeth Lee. London, 1895. 
Juvenal, D. Junius, Satires. Trans. J. D. Lewis. 2nd ed., 2 vols. 

London, 1882. 
Koppel, E., Don Quixote, Sancho Panza, und Dulcinea in der eng- 

lischen Literatur bis zur Restauration. In Herrigs Archiv, vol. 

CL 
[La Calprenede, Galtier de Coste], Cassandra, the Fam'd Romance, 

The Whole Work . . . Now Rendered into English by Sir 

Charles Cotterell. London 1676. 

Hymen's Praeludia, or Loves Master-Piece. Being that so 

much admired Romance entituled Cleopatra . . . rendered 

into English, by Robert Loveday. London, 1668. 
Lamb, Charles, The Dramatic Essays of. Ed. Brander Matthews. 

New York, 1891. 
Langbaine, Gerard, An Account of the English Dramatick Poets. 

Oxford, 1691. 
Langbaine, Gerard [and Gildon, Charles], The Lives and Charac- 
ters of the English Dramatick Poets. London, [1699]. 
L'Estrange, Sir Roger, Philo's Account of his Embassy from the 

Jews of Alexandria to the Emperor Caius Caligula. In the 

Works of Flavius Josephus. 4th ed. London, 1725. 
[Longueville, Thomas], Rochester and Other Literary Rakes of the 

Court of Charles II . . . 2nd ed. London, 1903. 
Lutrell, Narcissus, A Brief Historical Relation of State Papers. 

6 vols. Oxford, 1857. 
Macaulay, T. Babington, Critical and Miscellaneous Essays. 5 vols. 

Philadelphia, 1854. 

History of England. Ed. C. H. Firth. 6 vols. London, 

1913-15. 
MacMechan, Archibald, John Crowne: a Bibliographical Note. 

In Modern Language Notes, vol. VI, 1891. 
Massachusetts Archives. Vol. II. [MSS. records in the Massa- 
chusetts State House. Documents 506-508]. 
Massachusetts Historical Society, The Collections of. Winthrop 

Papers. Fifth series, vol. I. Boston, 1871. 
Massachusetts Historical Society, Proceedings of. 1863-64. vol. 

VII, Boston, 1864. 



204 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Matthews, Albert, Harvard Commencement Days 1642-1916. In 

Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, vol. 

XVIII. Cambridge, 1916. 
Meseray, de, A General Chronological History of France. Trans. 

John Bulteel. London, 1685. 
Metcalf, John G., Annals of the Town of Mendon, from 1658 to 

1880. Providence, 1880. 
Miles, Dudley H., The Influence of Moliere on Restoration Comedy. 

New York, 1910. 
Miscellany Poems upon Several Occasions . . . [Collected by 

Charles Gildon]. London, 1692. 
Moliere, The Plays of. in French. With an English Translation 

and Notes by A. R. Waller. 8 vols. Edinburgh, 1907. 
Moreto, Don Agustin, Comedias Escojidas de. 3 vols. Madrid, 

1826-31. 

Comedias Escogidas de. In Biblioteca de Autores Espanoles. 

Madrid, 1856. 
Muses Mercury: or the Monthly Miscellany, The, London, 1707. 
Musgrave, Sir William, Obituary Prior to 1800. Publications of 

the Harleian Society, vols. XLIV to XLIX, 1899-1901. 
Nettleton, George H., English Drama of the Restoration and 

Eighteenth Century. New York, 1914. 
New Englands First Fruits in Respect, First of the Conversion of 

some of the Indians ... 2. Of the progresse of Learn- 
ing, in the Colledge at Cambridge in Massacusets Bay . . . 

London, 1643. 
New-Hampshire Historical Society, Collections of. Containing 

Province Records and Court Papers from 1680 to 1692. Ed. 

Nathaniel Bouton. vol. VIII. Concord, 1866. 
[Nichols, J. G.], London Pageants. London, 1831. 
Noble, Mark. A Histroy of the College of Arms. London. 1805. 
North, Roger, Examen. London, 1740. 

Lives of the Norths. 3 vols. London, 1826. 
Notes and Observations on the Empress of Morocco. Or some Few 

Errata's to be Printed instead of the Sculptures with the Second 

Edition of that Play. London, 1674. 
Notes and Queries, Second Series, vols. VI and VII ; Third Series, 

vols. V and VIII ; Eighth Series, vol. VII. 
Oldmixon, John, The History of England during the Reigns of the 

Royal House of Stuarts. London, 1730. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 205 

Ovid, Metamorphoses. Trans. Henry T. Riley. London, 1908. 

Palfrey, J. G., A History of New England. 5 vols. Boston, 
1858-90. 

Peirce, Benjamin, A History of Harvard University. Cambridge, 
1833. 

Pepys, Samuel, The Diary of. Ed. H. B. Wheatley. 9 vols. Lon- 
don, 1893-99. 

Philo Judaeus, The Works of. Trans. C. D. Yonge. 4 vols. Lon- 
don, 1855. 

Pollock, John, The Popish Plot. London, 1903. 

Polybius, The Histories of. Trans. Evelyn S. Shuckburgh. 2 vols. 
London, 1889. 

[Pordage, Samuel], Azaria and Hushai, a Poem. London, 1682. 
The Medal Revers'd. A Satyre against Persecutio. London, 
1682. 

Post Boy, The. 1697-99. 

Pradon, [Nicolas], Les Oeuvres de. Paris, 1688. 

Public Acts of William and Mary, London, 1689. 

Quincy, Josiah, History of Harvard University. 2 vols. Cam- 
bridge, 1840. 

Racine, J., Oeuvres completes de. par L. Aime-Martin. 7 vols. 
Paris, 1825. 

Raleigh, Walter, The English Novel. New York, 1894. 

Ranke, Leopold von, A History of England Principally in the Sev- 
enteenth Century. 6 vols. Oxford, 1875. 

Rawlinson, George. The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy. Lon- 
don, 1873. 

Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County, Massa- 
chusetts. 4 vols. Salem, Mass., 1911-14. 

Records of the Colony of Rhode Island, and Providence Planta- 
tions, in New England. 1678-1706. Ed. John R. Bartlett. vol. 
HI, Providence, 1858. 

Records of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay in New England. Ed. 
Nathaniel B. Shurtleff. 4 vols, in five. Boston, 1854. 

Reyher, Paul, Les Masques Anglais. Paris, 1909. 

Ristine, F. H., English Tragicomedy. New York, 1910. 

Rosenbach, A. S. W., The Curious-Impertinent in English Dramatic 
Literature before Shelton's Translation of Don Quixote. Mod- 
ern Language Notes, vol. XVII, 1902. 

Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts. 4th and 5th reports. 
London, 1875-76. 



206 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

St. Serfe, Thomas, Tarugo's Wiles: or, The Coffee-House. A 
Comedy. London, 1668. 

St. Evremond, Oeuvres de. 5 vols. Paris, 1740. 

The Works of. Trans. Des Maizeaux. 3 vols., 2nd ed. Lon- 
don, 1728. 

Saintsbury, George, The English Novel. London, 1913. 

Schack, A. F. von, Geschichte der dramatischen Literatur und 
Kunst in Spanien. 3 vols. Berlin, 1846. 

Schelling, Felix E., The Restoration Drama. I, In The Cambridge 
History of English Literature, vol. VHI, chap. V. Cambridge, 
1912. 

Schlegel, A. W., Vorlesungen iiber dramatische Kunst und Litera- 
tur. In Sammtliche W,erke, vols. V and VI. Leipzig, 1846-47. 

Seneca, The Tenne Tragedies of. Reprinted in the Publications of 
the Spenser Society, vols. XLIII and XLIV, 1887. 
The Ten Tragedies of. Trans. Watson Bradshaw. London, 
1902. 

Seneca, Lucius Annaeus, The Works of. Trans. Thomas Lodge. 
London, 1620. 

[Settle, Elkanah], Absalom Senior: or, Achitophel Transpos'd. A 
Poem. London, 1682. 

Settle, Elkanah, The Empress of Morocco. A Tragedy. London, 
1687. 

[Shadwell, Thomas], The Medal of John Bayes: a Satyr against 
Folly and Knavery. London, 1682. 
The Works of. 4 vols. London, 1720. 

Shakespeare, William, The Plays and Poems of, with the Correc- 
tions and Illustrations of Various Commentators: Compre- 
hending a Life of the Poet, and an Enlarged History of the 
Stage by the Late Edmund Malone. Ed. J. Bos well. 21 vols. 
London, 1821. 

Sibley, John L., Biographical Sketches of Graduates of Harvard 
University. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1873-85. 

Sidney, Sir Philip, The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia. London, 
1898. 

Sophocles, Antigone. Trans. George Herbert Palmer. Boston, 
1899. 

Southerne, Thomas, The Loyal Brother. Ed. P. Hamilius. In Bib- 
liotheque de la Faculte de Philosophic et Lettres de I'Univer- 
site de Liege. Fascicule XX. Liege and Paris, 1911. 



LIFE AND DRAMATIC WORKS OF JOHN CROWNE 207 

Spence, Joseph, Anecdotes, Observations and Characters. London, 
1820. 

Spingarn, J. E., Critical Essays of the Seventeenth Century. 3 vols. 
Oxford, 1908-09. 

State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations at the End of 
the Century: A History. Ed. Edward Field. 3 vols. Boston 
and Syracuse, 1902. 

Stratford, Laurence, Edward the Fourth. London, 1910. 

Suetonius, C, Duodecim Caesares. Ed. C. B. Hase. 2 vols. Paris, 
1828. 

History of the Twelve Caesars. Trans. Philemon Holland 
Anno 1606. Tudor Reprints, 2 vols. London, 1899. 

Suffolk County Court Records 1671-80. [In the Boston Athen- 
aeum]. 

Suffolk Deeds. 14 vols. Boston, 1880-1906. 

Suffolk County, Massachusetts. Early Court Files. Vol. IX, paper 
913. i 

Suffolk County, Massachusetts. Probate Records. Vol. VI, part 2. 

Theatre Espagnol. 4 vols. Paris, 1770. [Moreto's No Puede Ser 
is translated under the title La Chose Impossible, and included 
in vol. III]. 

Tupper, James W., The Relation of the Heroic Play to the Ro- 
mances of Beaumont and Fletcher. In Publications of the Mod- 
ern Language Association of America. Vol. XX, 1905. 

Turnbull, Mrs. Laurence, The Royal Pawn of Venice: a Romance 
of Cyprus. Philadelphia, 1911. 

Van Laun, Henri, Les Plagiaires de Moliere en Angleterre. In Le 
Molieriste vols. II and III. 1880-82. 

Villiers, George, Duke of Buckingham, The Miscellaneous Works 
of. 2 vols. London, 1707. 

Virgilius, Maro, Omnia Opera. Ed. C. G. Heyne and N. E. Le- 
maire. 8 vols. Paris, 1819-22. 

Ward, A. W., A History of English Dramatic Literature. 3 vols. 
London, 1899. 

Ward, Edward, The Miracles Perform'd by Money, London, 1692. 

Welwood, James, Memoirs of the Most Material Transactions in 
England, for the Last Hundred Years. 3rd ed., London, 1700. 

Weyman, Henry T., The Members of Parliament for Bridgnorth. 
In Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural 
History Society, 4th series, vol. V, 1915. 



208 WESTERN RESERVE STUDIES 

Whibley, Charles, The Restoration Drama. II. In The Cambridge 

History of EngHsh Literature, vol. VIII, chap. VI Cambridge, 

1912 
Whincop, Thomas, Scanderbeg : or, Love and Liberty. A Tragedy. 

To which is added a List of all the Dramatic Authors . . . 

London, 1747. 
Wilmot, John, Earl of Rochester, Poems, on Several Occasions ; 

with Valentinian; a Tragedy. London, 1696. 

The Works of. Containing Poems on Several Occasions : His 

Lordship's Letters to Mrs. Savil and Mrs. * * * y^i^\^ 

Valentinian, a Tragedy. London, 1714. 
Wood, Anthony A., Athenae Oxonienses. Continued by Philip Bliss. 

4 vols. London, 1813-20. 
Wright, Rose A., The Political Play of the Restoration. [Yale]. 
Wycherley, William, [The Works of]. Ed. W. C. Ward. Mermaid 

Series. London, 1888. 



IN DEX 



Ambitious Statesman, The, 38, 53, 103- 

107, 181. 
Andromache, 73-77. 
Anne, as Princess, 79, 82; as Queen, 

50, 51. 
Antigone, 122. 
Appian, 163, 183. 
Arcadia, The Countess of Pembroke's, 

113. 
Arlington, Henry Bennet, lord, 40, 

92, 124. 
Arundel, Thomas Howard, earl of, 8. 

Barry, Mrs. Elizabeth, 42, 49, 146, 

151, 177. 
Bartholomew, A. T., 51, 185. 
Beaimiont and Fletcher, 112-113. 
Behn, Mrs. Aphra, 127, 170, 195. 
Beljame, A., 77. 
Betterton, Thomas, 49, 177. 
Blackmore, Richard, 192, 193, 194. 
Boston Neck, 20, 38, 46. 
Bracegirdle, Mrs. Anne, 49, 177. 
Buckingham, George, duke of, 33, 37. 
Bullen, A. H., 7. 
Butler, Lady Elianor, 110-113. 

Caligula, 47, 49, 171-176, 182, 193. 

Calisto, 34, 77-85, 186. 

Canfield, Dorothea, 76. 

Cervantes, 167, 168, 169. 

Charlanne, L., 77. 

Charles H, 34, 41, 56, 85, 138, 143. 

Charles the Eighth, 31, 68-73, 178. 

Cibber, Colley, 79, 82, 156. 

Cibber, Theophilus, 114. 

City Heiress, The, 170. 

City Politiques, 40, 123-137, 153, 187, 

189, 194. 
Colledge, Stephen, 127, 128, 129. 
Collier, Jeremy, 194. 
Commines, Philip de, 70. 
Congreve, Wm., 170, 177, 191, 192, 

195. 
Conquest of Granada, The, 102, 178. 
Cornaro, Caterina, 71, 72. 



Corneille, P., 100. 

Country Wife, The, 136, 187. 

Country Wit, The, 34, 85-92, 178, 186, 
189, 190, 194. 

Cromwell, Oliver, 13. 

Crowne, Agnes, 21, 22. 

Crowne, Henry, 19, 21. 

Crowne, John, father, 7-21; mother, 
22; birth, 22-24; education at Har- 
vard College, 25-28 ; return to Eng- 
land, 27-28 ; writing of Pandion, 28- 
30; beginning dramatist, 31-37; 
quarrel with Settle, 32-34, tory 
playwright, 37-40 ; efforts to recover 
father's estate in America, 38 ; favor 
with Charles II, 40-41 ; burlesque 
poems, 42-45 ; final efforts to recover 
estate, 47-51 ; royal charity, 50-51 ; 
death, 51 ; personal appearance, 51 ; 
religion, 52-55; politics, 55-59; per- 
sonality, 59-62; as a writer of trag- 
edy, 178-185 ; as a writer of com- 
edy, 185-195; as a poet, 195-196; for 
plays, see individual titles. 

Crowne, William, 7-21. 

Curriculum at Harvard, 1636-1692, 26- 
27. 

Curtius, Quintus, 148. 

Daeneids, 42, 43, 55. 

Darius, 42, 145-151, 182. 

Davis, Dr. Wm. H., 8. 

De la Tour, Sir Charles, 14. 

Demoiselle a la Mode, 144. 

Dennis, John, 7, 27, 28, 40, 41, 52, 60, 

124, 137, 138, 188. 
Destruction of Jerusalem, The, part 

I, 34, 92-97, 180. 

Destruction of Jerusalem, The, part 

II, 34, 98-103, 180. 
Dio Cassius, 97, 174. 
Don Quixote, 166. 
Dorset Garden Theatre, 68. 
Downes, John, 31, 46, 68, 138, 139, 177. 
Dryden, John, 32, 52, 63, 78, 79, 93, 

102, 103, 123, 124, 127, 181, 184, 

185. 
Duke's Theatre, The, 93. 
D'Urfey, Thomas, 127. 



210 



INDEX 



Empress of Morocco, The, 178. 
English Frier, The, 42, 151-158, 187, 

189, 193, 194. 
Etherege, Sir George, 40, 63, 87, 91, 

144, 145, 170, 191. 
Euripides, 149, 182. 
Evelyn, John, 77, 83, 84, 85, 186. 

Farquhar, George. 195. 
Fielding, Henry, 144. 
Fogg, Dr. J. S. H., 8. 

Garnett, Richard, 185, 195. 
Genest, John, 77, 85, 114, 122, 160, 
164. 

Gentleman's Journal, The, 158, 159, 
164. 

Gentleman's Magazine, The, 51. 

Gosse, Edmund, 185. 

Grammont, Count, 187. 

Grosse, Wilhelm, 10, 23, 24, 43, 89, 

90, 91, 135, 136, 143, 154, 169, 171, 

193, 194, 196. 
Guiccardini, Francesco, 70, 72. 

Harvard College, 25, 26, 27, 28, 53. 

Henry the Sixth, the First Part, 54, 
114-118, 181. 

Henry VI, (Shakespeare), 108, 115, 
116, 181. 

Hippolytus, 149, 182. 

History of the Famous and Passion- 
ate Love, The, 44, 55. 

Hypocrite, The, 156. 

James H, 48, 55, 58, 139, 146, 151, 

152, 157, 158, 159. 
Jones, Inigo, 84. 
Jonson, Ben, 84, 137, 186, 189. 
Josephus, 95-97, 99-100, 183. 
Juliana, 30, 31, 64-68, 178, 185. 
Justice Busy, 49, 177. 

La Calprenede, 97, 150. 

Langbaine, Gerald, 63, 70, 79, 81, 125, 

139, 185. 
Lee. Nathaniel, 37, 93, 124, 127, 147, 

150, 182, 185. 
Leigh, Anthony, 124, 133, 159. 
Love in a Wood, 91. 
Lutrin, Le, 42, 43. 

Mackworth (Crowne), Agnes, 10, 22. 



Mackworth, Humphrey, 11, 12, 13, 

22, 25. 
MacMechan, Archibald, 8, 14, 23. 
Maid's Tragedy, The, 112-113. 
M alone, Edmund, 36, 92. 
Married Beau, The, 46, 164-171, 189, 

190, 194. 

Mary, as Princess, 34, 79, 82; as 

Queen, 47, 152. 
Maynard, Sir John, 127, 132, 133. 
Mendon, 18-20. 
Miseries of Civil-War, The, 39, 53, 

107-114, 181. 
Moliere, 55, 61, 87, 89, 90, 144, 145, 

154, 155, 157, 169, 176, 189, 190, 

191, 196. 
Moreto, A., 141. 
Mounthope, 20, 38. 

Mulgrave, John Sheffield, earl of, 78. 

N on- Juror, The, 156, 158. 

No Puede Ser, 41, 141, 142, 143, 145, 

167. 
Norton, Rev. John, 26, 27. 
Nova Scotia, 14, 16, 18. 

Gates, Titus, 39, 53, 127, 129, 130. 

Oldys, William, 51. 

Otway, Thomas, 35, 36, 37, 93, 127, 

184. 
Ovid, 81. 

Pandion and Amphigeneia, 23, 28-30, 

178. 
Paper of Association, The, 123, 133- 

135. 
Petre, Edward, 55, 151, 156, 157. 
Philo, 175, 183. 
Polybius, 161, 163, 183. 
Popish Plot, The, 39, 57, 103, 107, 

123, 127. 
Pordage, Samuel, 123, 131. 
Post Boy, The, 171. 
Pradon, Nicholas, 46, 161, 162, 163, 

164, 182, 183. 
Purcell, Henry, 45, 165. 

Racine, 60, 61, 73, 75, 77, 100, 101. 

102, 183. 
Raleigh, Sir Walter, 29. 
Regulus, 46, 158-164, 182. 
Rival Queens, The, 147, 182. 



INDEX 



211 



Rochester, John Wilmot, earl of, 33, 

34, 36, 37, 56, 78. 
Rouge-Dragon, William Crowne as, 

9, 11, 16. 

St. Evremond, 94, 135, 136. 

St. Giles-in-the-Fields, church of, 51. 

Saintsbury, George, 30. 

St. Serfe, Thomas, 142, 143, 144. 

Satire on heroic drama, 178-179. 

Seneca, 120, 121, 174, 175, 183. 

Settle, Elkanah, 32, 52, 78, 127, 131. 

Shadwell, Thomas, 32, 46, 127, 131, 

195. 
Shaftesbury, Anthony Ashley Cooper, 

earl of, 39, 123, 127, 130, 131, 133. 
Shakespeare, William, 40, 61, 108, 109, 

113, 114, 115, 122, 181. 
She Would if She Could, 91, 170. 
Sir Courtly Nice, 41, 137-145, 188, 

189. 
Sir Phantast, oder Es Kann Nicht 

Seyn, 139. 
Sir Politick-Would-Be, 135. 
Sobieski, John, 66, 67. 
Sophocles, 122, 183. 
Southerne, Thomas, 46, 127, 167, 177. 



Spanish Friar, The, 152n. 

Spanish sources used by Crowne, 190. 

Spence, Joseph, 52. 

Steele, Richard, 194. 

Suetonius, 97, 172, 173, 174, 175, 183. 

Supernatural, the use of, 183-184. 

Tarugo's Wiles, 143, 145. 

Temple, Col. Thomas, 14, 15, 16, 17, 

18, 48, 195. 
Theatre Royal, The, 92. 
Thystes, 39, 54, 118-123, 181. 
Titus Andronicus, 122. 
Tonson, Jacob, 52. 

Unmogliche Sache, 139. 

Valentinian, 176, 183. 
Vanbrugh, Sir John, 195. 
Vega, Lope de, 141. 
Vergil, 45. 
Volpone, 137. 

Ward, A. W., 185, 195. 
William III, 49, 50, 55, 151. 
Wycherley, William, 23, 33, 40, 63, 87, 
91, 136, 191, 195. 



H 404 85 



O M O <U 



K- •" ^ 

1*°-'> V 























^^A 



















6°^ 



fitj 
















-^^^ 








c" » 





.0' o, '«.» <- ^. 










• » * /i- <f 








. -'-i^^^^P^** ^5-^ <^ •! |E;«3C''*fiecl using the Bookkeeper process 

>*^ • • A*^ , , . ^ Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

C^ * * /yT^ ■* ^O '^''^^''^6"' Date; March 2009 

% ^ PreservationTechnologies 

A 9^ -^Is^^O * WORLD LEADERJNrn"P_nTmNSPRESERVATIOM 










Ill Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township PA1 
(724)779-2111 











« --% 






■-*<*. 






o M 













> .^'JA^'^ <>. 




- •*>. 



0, J.^-.^ 



' * ^ ^ " SIS * <5* V, »^ 























>•>•. 



/ <4* •*• 







HECKMAN 

INC. 






*!*se»*h^- -f" 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




014 159 077 7 



